Syria

Senator Ludlam has called for War Powers reform and the obligation that all decisions on war involvement must be taken only in consultation with parliament. David Macilwain argues that the matter of Australian intervening militarily in Syria without Syria's permission should be pursued in the Senate and with the attorney general, George Brandis, because it is in breech of international law.

Letter to Senator Ludlam, Fri, Sep 11, 2015

Dear Senator Ludlam,

Last week on behalf of AMRIS the attached media release was sent to all MPs and media; my apologies if you have already seen and read it.

I am writing because I just saw a video of part of your speech on Thursday, echoing Melissa Parke’s call for War Powers reform and the obligation that all decisions on war involvement must be taken only in consultation with parliament.

As you point out of course, in this case such consultation would have led nowhere, because the Labor opposition has no problem with the government’s military deployment and submission to US authority. I would suggest therefore, that the matter – of what is quite clearly a breach of international law, for which their must be consequences – should be pursued in the senate and with the attorney general George Brandis.

While Brandis laid out the supposed justification for breaching Syria’s sovereignty on the spurious and irrelevant basis of ‘collective self-defence’, in an article in Thursday’s Australian, this seems no different from the advice received from Lord Goldsmith in 2003 that the attack on Iraq was justified. (even had there been WMD it is hard to see how such an act of aggression against a sovereign state by a country not sharing any border with it could have been ‘legal’.

It is not too late to pursue this, because Australia may be brought before the ICC for its infringements when they lead to culpable casualties of Syrians. The idea that somehow the North East of Syria where we intend to confine our military is ‘ungoverned space’ has already been dramatically exposed as nonsense by this report from Deir Al Zour. Leith Fadel of Almasdar news is quite reliable, and he reports how the Syrian army and air-force have repelled an attempted attack on Deir al Zour airbase, killing up to 100 IS fighters. Deir al Zour of course is on the Euphrates, and in a direct line between Anbar and Raqqa, in the area that Australia intends to deploy its fighter jets. It is easy to see the possibility that an Australian missile could hit a Syrian army platoon or vehicle if they are in close combat with IS. Such a strike would have consequences.

I hope that you will keep pursuing this matter with supportive colleagues. Australia can make a decision at any time to start cooperating with the Syrian government, if it is truly serious about stopping the terrorist groups, but otherwise we should immediately withdraw our support for the US coalition’s dirty little war and its terrorist ‘boots on the ground’.

All regards David Macilwain

Sandy Creek, Victoria

As has been quite obvious to most of us, the motivation and intention of the whole Western campaign in the Middle East remains the removal of Assad and the subsequent moves against Iran and Russia. IS is a Trojan horse, and the Great Refugee Crisis is the most egregious false flag yet devised to dupe the Western support base of the criminals in power.

Australia’s entry into the war on Syria has passed under our radar, thanks to manipulation of the refugee supporters – who are the main group who would be protesting against another US war in the M/E. My local paper published a letter today, (the third on this page) which explains for me – and probably almost me only – ‘no war in my name’.

But at the same time there was this report on the ABC from longtime ‘Friend of Syria’ Liz Jackson, interviewing former ambassador Ross Burns.:-

Saturday, September 12, 2015 08:03:0

ELIZABETH JACKSON: A former Australian ambassador to Syria says it's possible Australia could play a significant role in the ultimate removal of Bashar al-Assad.

Australia's Foreign Minister Julie Bishop is reportedly working with US secretary of state John Kerry on a political solution to oust Assad without promoting Islamic State.

I asked Dr Ross Burns, who was Australia's ambassador in Syria in the 1980s, whether the ambitious plan had any chance of success.

ROSS BURNS: I would think it might have some chance. I mean, it has more chance than any of the other moves which have taken place so far. It's very interesting that we are part of the stimulus behind it - if all this is confirmed, of course.

ELIZABETH JACKSON: Why do you say that it's interesting that we would be part of the stimulus?

ROSS BURNS: Well, I think our part is that - I mean, A: we're in the coalition on the air strikes; but B: we've also had this rather interesting relationship with the Iranians over the years. So we have - I mean, the Americans are not in Tehran; we are. So we can be a useful channel in that direction.

And I'd think the fact is that Julie Bishop was there a few months ago and seemed to get a lot out of the visit. So it doesn’t surprise me at all that she sees this as a bit of a challenge, where we can help out a bit.

ELIZABETH JACKSON: So do you see this as America directly using its ally, Australia, to achieve what it wants to achieve in the Middle East?

ROSS BURNS: Well, I think it's probably casting around for anything which can help at the moment. If you put together the hints from Kerry, the stuff which is coming out of Lavrov and the quite interesting statements from the Russian ambassador in Canberra, (NB this is pernicious fantasy...) I think you get a picture of a situation where people are beginning to realise this has gone on too long.

It's gone through many crises, many permutations and combinations. But we're now at a point where it's simply threatening to become a crisis of mammoth proportions.

If you - The way I read the Russian concern is that they're trying to bolster whatever effort the Syrian official army can still make to protect the Alawite heartland along the Syrian coast.

There really is a new strategic picture developing and I think everything has to be thrown into it from the Syrian side in order to prevent what could be the endgame. Now, when I say "endgame", I mean an endgame which might be a very slow endgame. But I think we know a bit more now about how the final configuration of this conflict might look.

ELIZABETH JACKSON: Well, how will that process of removing Assad actually unfold?

ROSS BURNS: What you have to set in place is to get all the players who have been backing various components of the crisis over the last four or five years to back off from their support of their - I wouldn't say "proxies" - but support of the groups that they've favoured over this time and just get across to them that the danger now is of ISIS grabbing more of Syria, getting further into western Syria where the greater part of the population is, where the greater number of minorities are and, of course, where the regime heartland has always been: in those coastal mountains.

ELIZABETH JACKSON: Is there anyone within his regime who looks like an attractive alternative?

ROSS BURNS: I can't think of too many in the family, I must say.

ELIZABETH JACKSON: I mean, it is a problem, isn't it? There aren't many contenders?

ROSS BURNS: Yeah. There are presumably some generals still around who might have a little less blood on their hands than the others. You know, that's what I think the Russians will be looking for.

And of course, the people who emerge in these situations in the past in Syria are people you've never, ever heard of before. That's how Bashar al-Assad's father came to power in 1970.

ELIZABETH JACKSON: Is there any successful precedent for this sort of transition in the Middle East at all?

ROSS BURNS: Ah, that's a good question. probably not in the Middle East, no. (latin America?...)

ELIZABETH JACKSON: So it would be a tremendous victory if they were able to remove him in this way?

ROSS BURNS: Oh, it'll be a terrifically difficult process; tremendously difficult.

ELIZABETH JACKSON: That's Dr Ross Burns, former Australian ambassador to Syria.

http://www.abc.net.au/am/content/2015/s4311256.htm

There was more to this interview in the earlier broadcast of the program on national radio, which included Jackson’s comments about the removals of Saddam Hussein and Muammar Qadhafi ‘not going so well’ – or some similar, which is why she says ‘so it would be a tremendous victory....’

Sometimes you hear something which makes you sit bolt upright, at 7am, and choke on the first sips of the morning tea...

Last week I received the final rejection from Julie Bishop, of my latest call for a parliamentary inquiry into Australia’s position on Syria, and the role of the state media, ABC and SBS in fostering and supporting the illegal and covert behaviour of our government.

What more can we do?

And I might say, that after a couple of days when barely anything has been said or discussed about the dangers of our intervention in escalating into a global war, on Saturday when there is nothing open for comment – no-one to abuse over the phone – we have this! By monday we’ll have moved on, or moved back to the tried and tested social issues that monopolise our ABC.

Courage!

President Bashar Al-Assad being interviewed by Charlie Rose
of 60 Minutes on 10 Sep 2013. For a corrupt, brutal dictator, as
he has been depicted by the Western media, he has shown him-
self remarkably willing to face long and probing interviews,
sometimes even with hostile interviewers.

According to the report cited in that article from the Israeli newspaper Haaretz, which can hardly be accused of bias towards the Syrian government, 88.7% of the 73.42% of eligible Syrian voters who voted, voted for President Bashar al-Assad. So, of 15,845,575 Syrians eligible to vote, eligible voters 10,319,723 or 65.13% voted for Bashar al-Assad. What other government in the world can claim this much popular support? Certainly not one of those countries, listed below, which support the terrorist invasion of Syria.

The supposed 'civil war', which has been going on for over four years in Syria, is, in fact an invasion by hordes of sociopaths from many corners of the globe, armed and paid for by the United States, France, Britain, Turkey, Jordan, Israel and the dictatorships of Saudi Arabia. Over 220,000 Syrians have died in that conflict so far. The sanctions, imposed on Syria by the Australian government under the fraudulent pretext of the claim that the Syrian government had murdered 108 of its citizens at Houla on 25 May 2012_{#fnAb3" id="txtAb3"> 3} , has further impeded the efforts of the Syrian government to fight the terrorists, thereby contributing to that horrific death toll. So, Australia, which shamefully participated in sanctions against Iraq from 1990 and two genocidal wars against in 1990 and 2003_{#fnAb4" id="txtAb4"> 4} , also has the blood of Syrians on its hands.

If Adam Bandt and others, who have spoken out against Tony Abbott's planned war against Syria, took the effort to learn that the Syrian government is supported by the people of Syria and made that known to the broader public, the task of ending the war would be that much easier.

Footnote[s]

#fnAb1" id="fnAb1">1. #txtAb1">↑  On 9 September 2015, Greens member of the Federal Parliament Adam Bandt 2016 posted the following comment to his Facebook page (my emphasis):

Adam Bandt I'm also distressed to hear reports that government members are advocating for a discriminatory intake of people who are fleeing the brutality of ISIS and the brutality of the Assad regime. When people around the country saw tragic images of Aylan Kurdi, a 3-year old boy whose body had washed up on the shore, they didn't ask what religion he was. People just said we want to help.

#fnAb2" id="fnAb2">2. #txtAb2">↑  The article was republished from http://www.globalresearch.ca/syrias-press-conference-the-united-nations-doesnt-want-you-to-see/5387795 . The 53 minute embedded video is at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZnFQd4wBXnk .

#fnAb3" id="fnAb3">3. #txtAb3">↑  See The Houla Massacre: The Disinformation Campaign (13/6/122) Global Research.

#fnAb4" id="fnAb4">4. #txtAb4">↑  According to Former US Attorney-General Ramsey Clark, as many a 3,300,00 Iraqis, including 750,000 children may have died as result. See Former US Attorney General: US (and Australian) sanctions against Iraq are genocidal (13/1/14) | Candobetter.

See also: Engineered Refugee Crisis to Justify "Safe Havens" in Syria (7/9/15) by Tony Cartalucci | Land Destroyer and other articles listed below.

The article below is formed from the start of Germany is 'exploiting' refugee suffering to recruit 'slaves' via mass immigration - Marine Le Pen (7/9/15) | RT. The remainder of the original article consists of stories about appeals by European pro-refugee-rights to let in untold numbers of refugees. ₁ 

As Germany welcomes thousands of refugees, with industries seeking ways to integrate newcomers into country's workforce, Berlin's move to temporarily bypass EU-wide regulations has met strong criticism from France's Marine Le Pen who accused Germany of recruiting "slaves."

The German drive to open its doors to refugees, as well as debated plans to resettle asylum seekers across the EU has been met with strong criticism from a number of politicians, including the leader of right-wing French party National Front, Marine Le Pen who accused Germany of imposing its immigration policy on the EU.

"Germany probably thinks its population is moribund, and it is probably seeking to lower wages and continue to recruit slaves through mass immigration," Marine Le Pen said in Marseille, refusing to admit that pure benevolence was Germany's only motive._{#fn2" id="txt2"> 2} 

Le Pen criticised European politicians for "exploiting the suffering of these poor people who cross the Mediterranean Sea."

"They are exploiting the death of the unfortunate in these trips organized by mafia, they show pictures, they exhibit the death of a child without any dignity just to blame the European consciences and make them accept the current situation," the National Front leader said.

Following days of chaos and uncertainty, thousands of refugees – mostly Syrians – were bused from Hungary to Austria, and then brought by train to Germany, after the countries agreed on allowing migrants access, bypassing the Dublin Regulation.

READ MORE: Thousands of refugees reach Germany after Hungary and Austria surrender to exodus

By Sunday night almost 11,000 migrants arrived in Germany, authorities in Munich said. Germany in August registered more than 100,000 asylum seekers with some 800,000 refugees overall expected to come to Germany in total this year – four times the level of last year.

Footnote[s]

#fn1" id="fn1">1. #txt1">↑  I have yet to see one of these pro-refugee-rights activists speak up against the West's attempt at regime-change in Syria, as Marine Le Pen has. This proxy war, overtly supported, since March 2011, by France, the United Kingdom, Turkey, the United States, Israel and the dictatorships of Saudi Arabia and Qatar has, so far, cost the lives of over 220,000 Syrians and is the principle driver of the refugee crisis. See YouTube Video of 3/1/13, Marine Le Pen and Alexander Lukashenko on Syrian Crisis, Marine Le Pen France's new Joan of Arc for Russians (22/3/12) | Live Leak, Le Pen says French government hiding true number of jihadists (20/11/14) | rfi English, Europe's Migrant Crisis Caused by West's Destabilization of Syria – Le Pen (29/8/15) | Sputnik News.

#fn2" id="fn2">2. #txt2">↑  How the RT author can know that Marine Le Pen is wrong about the motives of Angela Merkel and the German corporate interests she represents, is not explained in this artcle.

#OtherArticles" id="OtherArticles">See also: Marine Le Pen: migrants flee from death, brought by French (4/9/15) | Pravda.ru, Stephen Harper Promotes War in Syria as a "Solution to the Refugee Crisis": Canadian Government Is to Blame for the Death of Aylan Kudri (6/9/15) | Global Research, Enhanced US-NATO Military Action in Syria is Contemplated as a "Solution to the Refugee Crisis" (5/9/15) | Global Research, The Guardian: "bomb Assad and save the refugees" (4/9/15) | OffGuardian, Germany is 'exploiting' refugee suffering to recruit 'slaves' via mass immigration - Marine Le Pen (7/9/15) | RT, Europe has to deal with refugee disaster caused by US - Nicolas Maduro to RT (7/9/15) | RT, US to blame for Europe's refugee crisis: Venezuela president (/9/15) | PressTV

The death of a child and the blood on Washington's hands

If the chaos persists over a period of years with no end in sight, you will inevitably have a flood of refugees pouring out of the country.

This article by Richard Edmondson has previously been published (3/9/15) on Veterans Today and adapted (5/9/15) for the Syrian Free Press.

Washed ashore on a Turkish beach

This is the problem Europe is confronting now – and they brought it all on themselves by supporting America's regime-change policies in Syria and Libya. Both countries were prosperous and had stable governments prior to the US interference.

The boy in the photo above, whose body washed up on a Turkish beach Wednesday, has been identified as three-year-old Aylan Kurdi, from the Syrian town of Kobani. His mother as well as his five-year-old brother, Galip, also drowned. Kobani is located near the Turkish border. The family were able to make it over that border and into Turkey, along with many other Syrians, in a stream of refugees that began when ISIS launched its siege on Kobani.

This summer tens of thousands of Syrian refugees have been making their way to Turkey's Aegean coast in particular, this in an effort to gain passage to Greece. According to some estimates, the number departing by boat has averaged about 2,000 per day over the past month.

From the coast of Bodrum, in Turkey, to Kos, one of the eastern-most Greek islands, is only a distance of two miles, and some have been trying to make the trip in rubber dinghies. Early Wednesday, 23 people, including Aylan and his family, crowded into two small boats and set out for Kos from Akyarlar area of the Bodrum peninsula. Both of the vessels capsized in route to the island.

You can go here to watch a video of Aylan's body being found on the beach. The video also shows the body of a woman being pulled from the waves.

Syria is a country with a democratically elected government. In the presidential election, held in June of last year, Bashar Assad emerged with 88.7 percent of the vote. As I commented at the time:

Recently Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov referred to Assad as the "legitimate leader" of Syria. He is correct. He is.

But that makes no difference to the US. The US persists in its regime-change operation in Syria, training so-called "moderate" rebels, a group of misfits and degenerates whose thinking and ideology in reality differ very little from ISIS.

Obama and the mainstream media don't credit the American people with a lot of intelligence. They obviously think you're insufficiently bright to put two and two together and figure out that the moderate citizens of Syria, i.e. they who adhere to the principles of religious tolerance, support their government, and that it's the crazies who in reality are enjoying the backing and support of NATO and its allies.

The death of this child is a tragedy. But of course Aylan is only one boy.

Nearly a quarter of a million Syrians, according to some estimates, have died since the outbreak of the conflict in 2011. I'm going to say something that will sound startling and extreme to some, but the blood of every single one of these people is on the hands of the Obama administration, and particularly its policy makers in the State Department, as well as certain US allies.

Anyone and everyone who has provided weapons, training, or any other type of support...to Al Nusra, ISIS or any of the other armed gangs terrorizing Syria and driving people from their homes...bears a share of the responsibility.

Aylan's death, largely thanks to the photo above, has captured the attention of the mainstream media, but of course the media have refused to assign the blame where it belongs.

In fact the media, if anything, will likely spin the boy's death to justify further intervention in Syria. And this too is part of the problem.

By cheering on these conflicts, and demonizing certain leaders of certain countries who do not support Israel's occupation of the Palestinians, the media, too, are a major part of the problem.

So where is all this headed? Latest reports are that Russia has entered the fighting in Syria, although the claim has been officially denied by Russia. Either way, it's hard to see this coming to a peaceful resolution anytime soon. Meanwhile the killing will continue and the refugee problem will not abate, but do not expect this to bother the conscience of the war planners in Washington. In the halls of the State Department, no such thing as a conscience even exists.

This article has since been republished on the Syrian Free Press Network.

Following a meeting in Melbourne Australia of “Australians for Reconciliation in Syria” (AMRIS) today, 3 September 2015, spokesperson David Macilwain said that AMRIS unequivocally condemns atrocities committed by ‘Islamic State’ in Syria.

AMRIS deplores, however, the decision by the Australian Government to follow the lead of the United States in taking military action against IS within the borders of Syria, one of the founding members of the United Nations, without the consent of the Syrian Government.

Mr Macilwain said, "Such action will do little to ‘degrade and destroy’ the terrorist group, whose control over territory has only continued to increase despite a year of US Coalition airstrikes. Furthermore there have been significant civilian casualties and damage as a result of those airstrikes, leading to further refugee flows."

"While Australian involvement in the campaign in Syria will do little to change this situation, culpability for ‘collateral damage’ sustained within Syrian sovereign territory could bring us before the ICC," added Mr Macilwain.

"Rather than looking for an alternative pretext that might be legal, such as the ‘responsibility to protect’ Iraqis, AMRIS proposes a clear alternative - cooperation with the Syrian Army in its fight against IS and other terrorist groups."

"AMRIS also considers that if the Australian government is genuine in its desire and commitment to defeat IS, Al Qaeda and allied terrorist groups in Syria, and seeks to restore peace and security such that refugees can return, then it must be prepared to work in cooperation with the Syrian government and security forces. Such a commitment also entails the recognition of that government as legally constituted and representing the majority of the Syrian population, as mandated in the election of June 2014."_{#fn1" id="txt1"> 1} 

Mr Macilwain further stated, "In the absence of such cooperation with the Syrian authorities, Australian military intervention in the Syrian conflict will be neither legal nor moral, regardless of the stated target and pretext. The consequences of such an illegal intervention, which under international law constitutes the ‘supreme crime’ of launching a war of aggression, would be both inconceivable and uncontrollable."

"AMRIS demands that there must be a full disclosure of the objectives, conditions and limitations of this intervention, subject to a parliamentary debate and public scrutiny before this apparent decision to take us to war is finalised."

http://australiansforreconciliationinsyria.org/about/

David Macilwain.

Footnote[s]

#fn1" id="fn1">1. #txt1">↑  At the Presidential election of 4 June 2014, 10,319,723 Syrians, or 88.7% of the 73.42% of eligible Syrian voters who voted, voted for President Bashar al-Assad in spite of the obstruction of expatriate voters by some countries, including Australia and France.

The fair conduct of those elections was attested to by five international observers at a press conference held at the headquarters of the United Nations on 19 June 2014. See Syria's press conference the United Nations doesn't want you to see (21/6/15) with an embedded 53 minute YouTube broadcast. This article was previously published on Global Research.

I don't know of one of the leaders any one of the formal democracies opposed to Syria – the United States, Great Britain, Canada, France, Turkey, Israel, Australia, ... let alone the dictatorships of Saudi Arabia and Qatar – who can claim to have even close to President al-Assad's popular endoresement.

At the conference not one of the 'reporters' who, before and since, have peddled the narrative that Bashar al-Assad is a corrupt, brutal dictator, attempted to challenge their testimony.

While European governments cry crocodile tears over the mass migration of people from this region, Syrians are trying to get them and the US to stop backing so-called 'rebels' who are the very ones forcing people out of the region. The video inside came to candobetter.net from a source describing itself as 'a group of Syrian journalists (living in Syria) who have created a new Middle East Channel'. The video shows Syrian civilians who have come from near Idlib protesting outside the Red Cross in Damascus about the silence of the international press on the predicament of two villages isolated behind enemy ['rebel'] -held areas above Idlib, where two villagers have been kidnapped by Islamic extremists.

Below is a quote from Obama before he became president, counselling a completely opposite foreign policy to the warmongering one he now heads.[1] He calls for cooperation with Russia, a vigorous enforcement of nuclear non-proliferation, shutting down of the financial networks that support terrorism, pressure on the Saudis and Egyptians to stop oppressing their own people, and for an energy policy alternative to Big Oil's. Addressing the Bush government of eight years ago, he recognised the inflammatory and unfair process set in train by the United States in the Middle East. Yet now he pursues the same policy even more aggressively and dishonestly than Bush. He effectively heads a global coalition of war-criminals. Australia is a stooge in that coalition and so is the ABC, CBC, BBC, European Press, notably French mainstream press, and the Murdoch and Fairfax Press in Australia. Currently their greatest war-crime is to fail to reveal that President Bashar al-Assad is not an 'unelected dictator' but won overwhelmingly in a fair election in 2014 and currently offers protection to his people, but the Western allies and their corrupt Middle Eastern stooges - Saudi Arabia, Qatar and Turkey - are driving the exodus from the Middle East by sponsoring terror-militia.

Why are there so many displaced people? Perhaps somebody wanted a fight

Speech by Sen. Barack Obama delivered in Chicago on Oct. 2, 2002:

"So for those of us who seek a more just and secure world for our children, let us send a clear message to the president today. You want a fight, President Bush? Let's finish the fight with bin Laden and al-Qaida, through effective, coordinated intelligence, and a shutting down of the financial networks that support terrorism, and
a homeland security program that involves more than color-coded warnings.

You want a fight, President Bush?"

"Let's fight to make sure that the U.N. inspectors can do their work, and that we vigorously enforce a non-proliferation treaty, and that former enemies and current allies like Russia safeguard and ultimately eliminate their stores of nuclear material, and that nations like Pakistan and India never use the terrible weapons already in their possession, and that the arms merchants in our own country stop feeding the countless wars that rage across the globe.

You want a fight, President Bush?"

"Let's fight to make sure our so-called allies in the Middle East, the Saudis and the Egyptians, stop oppressing their own people, and suppressing dissent, and tolerating corruption and inequality, and mismanaging their economies so that their youth grow up without education, without prospects, without hope, the ready recruits of terrorist cells.

You want a fight, President Bush?

Let's fight to wean ourselves off Middle East oil, through an energy policy that doesn't simply serve the interests of Exxon and Mobil." (Excerpt from speech delivered by Sen. Barack Obama delivered in Chicago on Oct. 2, 2002.)

NOTES

[1] http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=433x33800 This speech is cited in many places and recently discussed in a new book, Lloyd Gardner, Killing Machine: The American Presidency in the Age of Drone Warfare.

(This article by Harrison Koehli was originally published at http://www.sott.net/article/300756-Russian-boots-on-the-ground-in-Syria-Middle-East-mayhem-intensifies on Fri, 28 Aug 2015.) Last month, in a task almost as difficult as Diogenes' search for one honest man, the U.S. allegedly found a staggering 60 'moderate rebels' in Syria to train in its interventionist program to oust Syrian president Bashar Al-Assad 'war against the Islamist terrorists'. This crack team of 'moderate' fighters, trained by the U.S. amid thousands of similarly-motivated terrorists of the Islamic State/al-Nusra/Free Syrian Army variety, demonstrated their valor by immediately refusing to fight Al-Qaeda-affiliated al-Nusra Front in Syria, a dangerous hesitation because they were subsequently attacked by al-Nusra fighters anyway.

As news of the group's uselessness reached Washington at the beginning of August, Obama then pledged airstrikes in Syria to defend said 'rebels', even from 'attacks' carried out by the legitimate authorities in Syria. The airstrikes began a couple weeks ago, launched from NATO bases in Turkey, thus opening a second front of air raids against Syria from the north, following over a year of NATO airstrikes from Iraq 'against Islamic State targets' in both Iraq and Syria's southern flanks. The massive bomb attack in late July at a Kurdish political youth meeting in Suruc, southern Turkey - allegedly carried out by 'ISIS' from Syria - the day before the Turkish air force joined in US bombing raids against targets in northern Syria, is also extremely suspect. I think we can reasonably suggest that internal political opponents were targeted by Erdogan's neo-Ottomanist regime, and their deaths used to justify cross-border air raids against Kurds in northern Syria.

Turkey's perfidy in all this needs to be underscored. Syria-based analyst Thierry Meyssan reckons the Russian alternative gas pipeline route to Mediterranean Europe - 'Turkish Stream', signed between Putin and Erdogan last December - is dead in the water. Indeed, Gazprom suspended related construction contracts in early July, before halving the gas transit capacity slated in the original deal. Turkey's official stance regarding Crimea's secession to Russia is that it "will never recognize Russia's annexation." Ankara has also been dangling massive loans to the Kiev regime and hosting a Crimean Tatar lobby group convention, attended by Kiev's foreign minister, and calling for Russia to 'return Crimea to Ukraine'.

In a saner world, there would be no confusion as to what is going on in and around Syria because the military intervention there would be called what it is. When one country (and its allies) trains a group of fighters in another country under the pretext of preventing marauding terrorists in that country from spreading to other countries, but really to take down the government of said country, then it is an aggressive act by the forces of one state against another. Just because the U.S. says it is justified in 'self-defending' their foreign-trained subversive group from Syria's legitimate self-defense, does not make it so. To paraphrase John Kerry, you can't just attack a country's military on a trumped-up pretext... Well, actually, you can: the U.S. does it all the time.

With typically diplomatic understatement, Russian Foreign Minister Lavrov called Washington's plan "counterproductive." He reasonably pointed out the humanitarian disaster in Syria - caused by the US/NATO intervention - and called for "an immediate end to external intervention" in the crisis. In contrast, White House spokesman Josh Earnest, with typical American bluster and arrogance, said Syria "should not interfere" with the U.S.-trained 'rebel' operations, and threatened "additional steps" would be taken to "defend them".

Despite many months of airstrikes - ostensibly targeting ISIS in Iraq - the marauding bands of mercenaries are apparently as numerous as ever. Not only are the airstrikes killing hundreds of civilians, they are turning locals against the U.S., whom they see as acting with questionable motives. In other words, many are joining ISIS in response to yet more American atrocities in the region. The case can be made, of course, that that serves U.S. interests just fine. The more ISIS fighters they have to fight, the more justified their case for further military intervention; more airstrikes, more carnage, and the chance that maybe, just, maybe, they'll actually succeed in their plans to oust Assad and keep Iran and Hezbollah on a tight leash.

In the meantime, Russia continues doing what it does best: establishing mutually beneficial economic ties with other sovereign nations (instead of working to destabilize them through destruction and murder), attempting to solve problems with diplomacy, and proposing military strategies that respect said nations' sovereignty.

In 2007, Russia signed a deal with Iran to supply S-300 long-range, defensive, surface-to-air missile systems. In 2010, Russia reneged on the agreement, voluntarily embargoing the sale in line with an international (read: U.S.) ban on selling weapons to Iran. Iran filed a lawsuit in response, but the recent 'nuclear' deal, in which Russia played an integral role, has changed the situation. Russia and Iran have now ironed out all but minor technical details, and Iran should see delivery of the S-300s by the end of the year.

The net result of all the violence we've seen in the Middle East since 9/11 to contain Iran - and keep Russia out of the region - is that the two countries have gotten closer. The two nations' respective foreign ministers met recently and stated their united position regarding Syria, warning against any external attempts to dictate a 'resolution'. They also made plans to expand trade, including the possibility of Iran acquiring Russian-built nuclear reactors.

Russian foreign minister Sergey Lavrov

    

There is similar news out of Egypt: Putin's recent meeting with President al-Sisi saw the Egyptian government supporting Russia's plan to create a real anti-ISIS coalition made up of the forces actually fighting ISIS: the Iraqis, the Syrians, and the Kurds - who have all done a better job than the U.S.-trained 'rebels' and the ineffectual and counterproductive airstrikes (and airdrops). In addition, Egypt hopes to find itself included in the Eurasian Economic Union (EAEU) free trade zone in the near future, eschewing the high-and-mighty U.S. dollar by facilitating trade between Egypt and Russia in their respective currencies. The sanctions against Russia have benefited Egypt nicely, opening opportunities for increased food trade. Oh, and Egypt too is looking forward to some Russian-built nuclear power plants. The 'reality-creators' in Washington must be very pleased that their anti-Russian sanctions campaign has been so 'successful': it just keeps making Russia more friends, who then support policies that work toward results the anti-Russian sanctions were designed to prevent in the first place!

And now it looks like Russia is moving beyond diplomacy and trade deals to directly support Syria directly in its fight against foreign-backed terrorists destroying the country piece by piece. A Syrian newspaper, Al-Watan, said yesterday that many Russian "military advisors have reached Damascus" in recent weeks, and that Russia has begun supplying Damascus with satellite imagery. Rumor has it (from the opposition-linked Syria Forum's AlSouria.net) that "a Russian technical crew had been scrambled to the outskirts of Latakia ... to bolster the regime's defensive lines as the Islamist Army of Conquest in the nearby Al-Ghab plain threaten to advance on Alawite population centers," and that advisors have proposed to build a military base there.

Al-Watan also reported that the advisors "have set about gathering a large amount of information that will make it possible to study the potential deployment of international forces under the patronage of the United Nations," adding that the Kremlin "will study the potential launch of a separate Russian operation as well as another joint [operation] with the Collective Security Treaty Organization, which will convene in Tajikistan's [capital city] Dushanbe on September 15."

Shortly after the U.S. decision on August 4th to 'defend' its rebels by bombing Syria, the head of Russia's Airborne Troops, Colonel General Vladimir Shamanov, stated that he was willing to deploy elite counter-terror forces on missions in Syria. Dmitry Peskov, Putin's press secretary, denied that Damascus had asked for troops. Perhaps Col. Gen. Shamanov's statement was a message of Russia's willingness to comply should Damascus ask? After all, Russia has been supplying financial and diplomatic support to Damascus since the regime change operation started in 2011, and just recently signed an agreement to provide advanced MiG-29M and MiG-31 fighter jets to Syria's Air Force.

In an interview with Lebanese al-Manar TV last Tuesday, President al-Assad had this to say:

The President asserted that Russia doesn't support individuals or a specific president, saying that this would be unacceptable and would constitute interference in internal affairs; rather Russia supports specific principles, which are the sovereignty of state and people.

On Russian efforts now that Geneva 3 is looming, President al-Assad said:

"We have great trust in the Russians, and they proved throughout this crisis since four years ago that they are honest and transparent with us in relations and that they are principled. These are important points. So, when they meet various sides, we don't feel concern that these sides might distort the true image for the Russians. The Russians have close relations with Syria and are capable of finding out about all that is happening accurately. We believe the goal of the Russians is to bring political sides towards dialogue to cut off calls for war.

"This is the goal, but in the end there won't be an agreement over anything unless we Syrians sit with each other and hold dialogue with each other. It won't be the Russians who impose any solution, so we encourage them to meet all forces and we are relieved when a Russian official meets any figure, without exception."

Whatever happens, it doesn't look like Russia will back down from its fidelity to the principles of sovereignty and international cooperation. Whatever hare-brained insanity the West comes up with - whether directly against Russia, or by proxy in Ukraine, or elsewhere in the Middle East, the Caucasus, or Central Asia - Russia has thus far responded elegantly and reasonably. Like a six-year-old trapped by its own contradictory set of lies, the West is in a bind when it comes to Syria and ISIS (not to mention Ukraine). They can't reasonably keep up the pretense that they want to destroy ISIS while denying Russia's proposal to create a real coalition of those nations actually suffering from ISIS's depravity. Something's gotta give.

#searching" onclick="SuperSearchBioClick('Harrison Koehli');">

#searching" onclick="SuperSearchBioClick('Harrison Koehli');">Harrison Koehli

Harrison Koehli hails from Edmonton, Alberta. A graduate of studies in music performance, Harrison is also an editor for Red Pill Press and has been interviewed on several North American radio shows in recognition of his contributions to advancing the study of ponerology. In addition to music and books, Harrison enjoys tobacco and bacon (often at the same time) and dislikes cell phones, vegetables, and fascists

This article was previously published (24/8/15) on Russia Insider.

The Syrians who are being terrorised by the foreign-backed insurgents are genuine, and so is Russia with its joint counter-terrorism plan But the US and its Coalition against ISIS? What are their interests? Do they care for Syrians and their army at all? When George W Bush first declared the 'War on Terror' it seemed like just another of his 'mis-speaks' – surely he must have meant 'War on Terrorism'? But we didn't really bother because we knew it was neither, but just a label for wars of convenience on someone else's Terra.

A tough sell for the US to claim it's serious about fighting terrorism in Syria when it actually refuses to oppose Al Qaeda 1  (The footnote URL previously linked to the wrong page. Apologies - Ed)

As these wars of opportunism fought by the United States to expand its interests and control pass their fourteenth year however, their supposed target has now grown to fit Bush's description, as legions of stereo-typical 'terrorists' rampage across America's foreign battlefields.

Perhaps it should be no surprise to find that this morphosis in the enemy has been accompanied by a change in how it is portrayed by the prosecutors of the war on terror and their client media.

Just as they pretended to be fighting terrorism in all those years when they were fighting for control of Iraq's oil fields, now they are pretending to fight against 'violent extremism' and 'radicalisation' at home, while justifying their ongoing campaign abroad as 'self-defence' – the 'Islamist death-cult' must be prevented from spreading beyond the boundaries of the chosen battlefields, and coming home to bite its trainers. (That campaign of course is little altered, though now rapidly expanding in scale to threaten the whole region, including Russia)

But there's another reason for this 'rebranding of the enemy' to sell it to the Western public – the countries who have to actually fight and die at the hands of this terrorist enemy are calling it by its real name, so the West can no longer use it without admitting that they share a common foe.

This has come into sharp focus in recent weeks with the launching by Russia of a bold initiative – putting together a group of states to fight the terrorist groups in Syria. It is a bold initiative because two of those states have been the main supporters of the Syrian insurgency, and must be convinced that it is in their own interests to change direction, as well as to abandon their quest to overthrow the Syrian government.

But Russia's initiative is no gambit, as it begins with one unyielding condition – that President Assad is going nowhere until stability is restored, when new free elections can decide if he will remain Syrians' choice of president.

The Russian joint counter-terrorism plan has another feature which distinguishes it from all the plans past and current of the self-declared 'international community' to 'fight terror' or to 'degrade and destroy Da'esh' – it is what it says, and doesn't conceal some hidden agenda.

And as far as Russia and Syria are concerned, this means fighting ALL the armed groups who are terrorising the inhabitants of villages and cities in Syria, regardless of their affiliation or alleged justification for taking up arms against the Syrian Arab Army.

Apart from calling the US coalition's bluff - that it is only protecting Syria and the world from Da'esh, this plan obviously directly targets groups that the US is not targeting, like 'Syria's Al Qaeda' – Jabhat al Nusra, or actually supporting, like the mythical 'Free Syrian Army' or its new 'Division 30'.

As far as the Syrian army and the people they are defending are concerned such labels are irrelevant and offensive – they simply want to see the end of this foreign-backed insurgency with the death or disarming of all its fighters.

Recently we heard from a friend who has returned to his home in Aleppo, and who has particularly acute observations to make of how it feels to be under constant threat of attack from terrorists, as they daily fire their home made gas-cylinder missiles to kill and terrorise residents of the government-secured section of the city.

Aleppo has also been suffering from a water shortage, as the insurgent groups have control of the supply from the Euphrates and only allow it to reach the rest of Aleppo via the Queiq river, into which they have dumped dead bodies and sewage. He describes how he feels:

"Those capable of dumping bread and clean water into a contaminated river to prevent half the city from eating the bread or having clean drinking water are committing heinous crimes against humanity.

I am not sure if it is a "war crime" as such but they are the real "infidels" if there is any real meaning for this word that they bandy about so liberally.

They are not "freedom fighters" or "moderates" that NATO and their allies are supporting so vociferously. We are suffering from lack of water, we go thirsty while they are intentionally squandering it.

I watch, heavy hearted, as the elderly and children patiently wait in endless queues in the searing heat to fill their assorted containers. I see them having to lug these heavy containers through the narrow alleyways, struggling under the weight as the precious water splashes into the dust beneath their feet.

I feel nothing but rage when I see these thugs and criminals on the other side of the city pouring thousands of litres of clean, fresh water into the disease infested river under the noses of the thirsty Syrians they are claiming to liberate.

They are the terrorists, they are the monsters in this story and they are committing daily mass crimes against the citizens of Aleppo, but this is never mentioned by the western media.

This is Aleppo, the real Aleppo, not the western media fantasy, this is our sleeping, waking, perpetual nightmare of life under terrorist occupation."

So what does the 'Coalition against ISIS' have to say about these terrorists targeting Syrians and their soldiers? It says: 'do what you like but don't target us'. And as Australia stands ready to expand its air force deployment over the border from Iraq following a US request, the danger to Australian forces from pursuit at the International Criminal Court seems to be the main consideration. For our friend in Aleppo such insufferable conceit would make Australia's likely contribution to Syria's suffering indistinguishable from all the rest.

Al Nusra's home-made gas canister cannons

Footnote[s]

#fntSy1" id="fntSy1">1. #txttSy1">↑  The photo is of al-Nusra terrorists making a show of force in the Syrian town of Tell Abyad on 2 Jan 2014.

The Syrian Arab Army is fighting a war but not against anti government rebels as depicted in the mainstream media, rather its a dirty war against a merciless, depraved and bloodthirsty proxy army funded, armed and supported by the Empire interventionist alliance [US, Turkey, KSA, Jordan, NATO, Israel]. It is now well documented that Turkey is the main rat run, supplying weapons, supplies, chemical weapon ingredients and manpower often via the pseudo aid convoys. Serena Shim reported that WHO trucks were running arms and equipment to “rebels” shortly before she was killed in a mysterious car accident, after receiving death threats."HRW, Amnesty International and assorted Humanitarian offshoots are on a ceaseless crusade against the SAA use of barrel bombs.  Today, Ken Roth even compared the use of Barrel bombs to the destruction caused by the nuclear bomb used on Hiroshima.

[Article first published at https://thewallwillfall.wordpress.com/2015/08/09/syria-welcome-to-hell/]

Barrel bombs are also responsible for all refugees…not our Governments imperialist, murderous plundering of sovereign nations. Then the “delectable” Annie Sparrow [ Roth’s wife] is blaming all destruction in Idlib on the SAA, never a mention of US backed terrorist chemical weapons, hell cannons, mortars, suicide bombers, beheaders, racists and rapists.

The barrel bomb itself is a rudimentary missile, cheap to produce [around $ 200 per bomb depending upon level of TNT].  It has design faults in that the fins on the bomb are still not aerodynamically perfect, despite several changes.  The detonation depends upon the bomb falling vertically on to its nose to trigger the detonator.  It actually has a  relatively high failure rate but even undetonated they are relatively safe as it would take serious nose pressure to detonate. Its supposed advantage is that it can be launched from helicopters and the accusation is always that only the SAA use helicopters in Syrian airspace.  This has been proven untrue.  It has been well documented that Turkey supplied helicopter cover for terrorist forces.  “In the morning attack on Kassab, Syria on March 21, 2014 it was Turkish military helicopters which began the attack.  That morning 88 unarmed civilians were killed, and 13 of those beheaded.  The Turkish military assisted the FSA, Jibhat al Nusra, and Al Qaeda that morning with heavy canon fire and helicopter missiles shot at the Kassab police station.”

Barrel bomb.

It must be remembered that the SAA is fighting a war but not against anti government rebels as depicted in the mainstream media, rather its a dirty war against a merciless, depraved and bloodthirsty proxy army funded, armed and supported by the Empire interventionist alliance [US, Turkey, KSA, Jordan, NATO, Israel].  It is now well documented that Turkey is the main rat run, supplying weapons, supplies, chemical weapon ingredients and manpower often via the pseudo aid convoys.  Serena Shim reported that WHO trucks were running arms and equipment to “rebels” shortly before she was killed in a mysterious car accident, after receiving death threats.

In war, civilian life is lost, it is unavoidable and particularly when terrorists embed themselves into civilian areas, converting civilians into human shields.  Of course this is never mentioned by the Ken Roths and Annie Sparrows.  Neither is it mentioned that the SAA make every feasible effort to evacuate densely populated civilian areas prior to targeting terrorist cells.

Another aspect of this warfare that is consummately ignored are the terrorist mortars and hell cannons that cause extensive structural damage and massacre civilians with a range of up to one mile.  How is it that these HRW “witnesses” on the ground [presumably under a barrage of missiles from both SAA and “rebels”] can categorically state what is causing damage and loss of life.  The unreliable barrel bomb or the ground based and mobile hell cannon units that fire upon civilian areas indiscriminately or even the terrorist dug tunnels, packed with explosives and detonated as a diversion before they attack SAA/NDF positions.

Terrorist forces packing gas canisters with explosives to arm their Hell Cannons

Read Eva Bartlett’s account of terrorist mortar attacks:  The Terrorism We Support in Syria: A First-hand Account of the Use of Mortars against Civilians

This is a first hand account from an Aleppo resident under fire from terrorist mortars and shells.

 ” The people are crying and terrified by the “moderate peaceful opposition”. But we can’t bomb them because the “international community” will blame the Syrian army of using their unprecedented super ultra weapon that is way stronger than a nuclear bomb: Barrel bombs!
The terrorists are using mortars, explosive bullets, cooking-gas cylinders bombs and water-warming long cylinders bombs, filled up with explosives and shrapnel and nails, in what they call “Hell Canon”. (google these weapons or see their YouTube clips. The cooking-gas cylinder is made of steel, and it weighs around 25 kg. Imagine it thrown by a canon to hit civilians? And imagine knowing that it’s full with explosives?… Yet, the media is busy with the legendary weapon of “barrel bombs”! They came to spread “freedom” among Syrians! How dare they say that Syrian army shouldn’t fight them back?
For the first time last night, we smelled gunpowder. The shelling was so extreme to smell gunpowder in the air.
Results were nothing but new innocent victims. I mean, the terrorists failed in gaining new land, or occupying new buildings or quarters. They lost many of their “zombies”, but they don’t count, because they have no families or friends to weep on them like the case with civilians.
I apologize that I’m very upset, mostly not from the attackers and whoever is supporting them in Turkey over here (and Israel and Jordan in the south); but mainly from the liars in that conference in Britain or at the UN , who keep lying and lying, piles and tons of lies, about “freedom” and “barrel bombs” and live in their perfumed and ironed suites and ties, happy with their Ph.D. degrees in stupidity and fooling the world, having no problem in obtaining clean water, electricity, warm food, and the rest of services that we are suffering over here to obtain part of them. Those people travel in 1st class airlines, and live in 5 stars hotels, and ready to come on tv channels to weep upon the “Syrian people” and blame the “regime” while giving a blind eye upon all the terrorists they are funding and supporting. I wish these people, whether they were Arabs or Westerns, Muslims or Christians, Syrians or others… I wish them Hell! And to taste and suffer the same pain they caused to innocent people.

Syrian army had defended the city, and all the lies on the media claiming the terrorists victories are nothing but rumours and gossip.

President Bashar al-Assad had gifted Aleppo yesterday with about $15.5 million as an urgent aid to the city.”

Hell cannon Aleppo

The Hell cannon is a “wildly inaccurate” weapon even according to the Empire one man propaganda band, Syrian Observatory for Human Rights.  In Aleppo the SAA is marooned in the centre of the Old Citadel and is fired upon by “rebel” positions scattered throughout the city.  These inaccurate weapons are known to have caused massive damage to ancient Aleppo edifices but have also torn into civilian areas and ripped civilian limbs and bodies into shreds.

Hell cannon Aleppo

“Aleppo city has shrunk to a fifth of its original size, and became so crowded with refugees that fled their areas after they fell into terrorist hands. I walk everyday in the city. I see children, young girls without limbs because of a terrorist mortar  or shrapnel  that targets them randomly and causes  terrible wounds and horrific memories that will never leave them. The girl who lost one leg is standing on her good leg and selling bread, while the little boy who lost one arm is selling chewing gum. Those are the “injured” people who are mentioned fleetingly in the news, just numbers in one line of a report, after each attack from the terrorists. “Injured” doesn’t mean scratched or having a bleeding finger; it means someone lost his eyes or her limbs.”

There is, undeniably, a need to report upon all mortalities as a result of this devastating proxy conflict. However the glaring bias towards the demonization of the legitimate national fighting force, battling a vicious, brutal and mercenary enemy is a despicable insult to the intelligence & courage of the Syrian people and a deliberate obscurantism of truth and the extent of the duplicity and hypocrisy of our own governments.

Responsibility for the refugee crisis, the horrific deaths, rapes and kidnapping of civilians across the Middle East may be laid squarely at their blood soaked feet.

Apart from its illegality under international law, any Australian military involvement in Syria at this stage, even to fight Da’esh, would be both illegitimate and foolish. It is past time that Australia changed its stance on refusing to recognise the legitimately elected government of Syria, and started to support Syria’s fight against the legions of foreign-backed terrorists, including Da’esh – a fight in which the Syrian army has already lost more than 100,000 soldiers, but which it is determined to win.

Dear Tanya Plibersek,

I wrote to you on the 17th of June to notify you of a letter I sent to Julie Bishop through my local MP Cathy McGowan, regarding Australia’s stance on the Syrian conflict. Following news this morning of a reconsideration of Australia’s support for the US coalition against Da’esh by some in the government, I was encouraged to hear your response as expressed to Fran Kelly on RN, and so am resending my submission on this for your consideration.

I will copy my email from June here fyi:

Dear Tanya Plibersek,

Yesterday I wrote to Foreign Minister Julie Bishop challenging the Australian governments position on the Syrian conflict, and particularly on culpability for the use of Chemical Weapons.

I am specially concerned by the recent all out assault on NW Syria by thousands of takfiris brought across the border by Turkey in a plan coordinated with Saudi Arabia and Qatar to overthrow Syria’s legitimate government. Not only has this illegal and lethal assault received little attention from Australian media, but it is implicitly supported by Australia through our operation with the US-led coalition, purportedly fighting Da’ish/Islamic State.

Even though Australian forces are currently limiting operations to Iraq, it is inevitable that this will extend to involvement in Syria as the conflict continues to worsen, unless action is taken now against Turkey, Saudi Arabia and Jordan to immediately cut supply routes to all the terrorist groups operating in Syria.

It is vital that the Australian parliament should examine Australia’s role in the Syrian conflict and make a decision on exactly who we should support based on the facts rather than the shallow and partisan allegations of Opposition activist groups and politically aligned Western media organisations, including our own.

There must come a point where the ‘automatic bipartisan support on National Security matters’ is challenged; this government’s behaviour in multiple foreign conflicts now constitutes the greater threat to our national security.

I attach my letter to Minister Bishop, which includes links to supportive references.

................

The situation has of course changed significantly since June, but in two contradictory ways. Firstly the Turkish government has started to ‘cooperate’ with the US in the fight ‘against ISIS’ by allowing the use of Incirlik base to launch airstrikes in Syria, and with talk of creating an ‘ISIS free zone’ in NW Syria. Turkey has no interest in fighting the group which it has actively been supporting for the last couple of years in its fight against the Syrian government, and rather has used this ‘cooperation’ as a way of attacking the PKK and YPG, which are its real opponents.

Despite this completely illegal incursion into Syrian territory, as well as claims by the US that it will not target the Syrian Arab Army, the possible escalation of the ‘civil war’ in Syria is cause for extreme concern.

Besides this development, the last few weeks has seen the most significant Russian diplomacy in the region bring together the Syrian and Saudi security chiefs in Riyadh with a view to jointly fighting all the terrorist groups in Syria, including the Al Nusra forces that the KSA and Turkey have been supporting. While the Saudis are currently refusing to accept the Russian proposal, and position that the Syrian government of President Assad is non-negotiable, Russia’s diplomacy is clearly backed by formidable forces, including support from Iran and China.

Russia has also made its position quite clear to the US through John Kerry, and even though the US continues to say that ‘Assad must go’, the indication are that the US will finally admit that its project for regime change in Syria has failed.

So apart from its illegality under international law, any Australian military involvement in Syria at this stage, even to fight Da’esh, would be both illegitimate and foolish. It is passed time that Australia changed its stance on refusing to recognise the legitimately elected government of Syria, and started to support Syria’s fight against the legions of foreign-backed terrorists, including Da’esh – a fight in which the Syrian army has already lost more than 100,000 soldiers, but which it is determined to win.

I urge the Labor party to make a stand on this issue, as well as demanding that any further commitment of Australian forces in foreign conflicts must be debated and decided by parliament.

I will follow up this letter with a phone call, and look forward to your response.

kind regards, David Macilwain, Sandy Creek, Victoria.

The misreporting and failure to report on the nature of the threat facing Syrian society – by which I mean the majority of that society which supports the Syrian army and the Syrian president against the foreign-backed insurgency – has now assumed a far less benign role in the Syrian conflict; in the view of many, the Western mainstream media have now become complicit with that insurgency, and in controlling the narrative that enables an illegal and criminal violation of Syrian sovereignty.

The Honourable Minister for Foreign Affairs Julie Bishop
David Macilwain,
Sandy Creek, Victoria
16th June 2015
Dear Minister Bishop,

While acknowledging your response to my letter of 10th October last year, which seriously challenged the accepted narrative on the situation in Syria and the Australian government’s position on it, I urge you now to reconsider the points I made in the light of recent developments, particularly in regard to the use of Chemical Weapons.

As I’m sure you are aware, a collaboration between Saudi and Turkish Intelligence agencies facilitated an invasion of NW Syria by thousands of ‘violent extremists’ in March, with the objective of overthrowing the Assad government. (#1) While the US may not have been directly party to this operation with the immediate supply of arms, the possession of new US-made TOW anti-tank missiles by the ‘Army of Conquest’ – Jaish al Fatah – was a critical factor in the violent recapture of towns and territory over which the Syrian Arab Army had control. The fall of Idlib to these mercenaries was well publicised in our media, though its illegal and aggressive nature was obscured by Opposition claims of fatalities from a ‘Chlorine’ attack on a nearby village by the Syrian army. (No credible evidence exists of the use of Chlorine or ‘barrel bombs’ by the army, just as no credible reason could be given for the government targeting Syrian civilians rather than the terrorists who are threatening the whole Syrian state.)

The failure of Australian mainstream media to acknowledge the nature of this renewed and extreme challenge to the Syrian state, and the failure to identify and condemn the countries responsible for financing and arming the ‘Army of Conquest’, was initially compounded by the concurrent focus on the ANZACs and the commemorations in Turkey. Far from this becoming an occasion to present the current resurgence of Erdogan’s ‘Ottoman empire’ in the light of history, the reality of Turkey’s active support for jihadist groups in Syria including Da’ish/IS passed unnoticed. Even though the army of conquest is dominated by Syria’s Al Qaeda – Jabhat an Nusra – which remains a proscribed terrorist organisation by Australia and her Western allies, both authorities and media seem unaware or unconcerned by its trail of death and destruction. Even An Nusra’s massive truck bomb attack on the National Hospital in Jisr al Shughour failed to interest our national broadcaster, no more the massacre of hundreds of soldiers and civilians as they later tried to escape the attackers.

Writing recently in the Independent, veteran journalist Robert Fisk related the accounts of soldiers recovering from the siege in the hospital in Lattakia, (#2) and confirmed that some of the mercenaries who invaded Jisr al Shughour were Turkish; from other reliable sources it appears that this army was composed mainly of Turks and Chechens.

The misreporting and failure to report on the nature of the threat facing Syrian society – by which I mean the majority of that society which supports the Syrian army and the Syrian president against the foreign-backed insurgency – has now assumed a far less benign role in the Syrian conflict; in the view of many the Western mainstream media have now become complicit with that insurgency, and in controlling the narrative that enables an illegal and criminal violation of Syrian sovereignty. As an example of this role – and one which could only be called ‘supportive propaganda’, both SBS and ABC recently aired programmes which presented the ‘violent extremists’ of Jabhat an Nusra in a relatively sympathetic light, and as fighters in a legitimate struggle against a despotic and violent regime. SBS Dateline screened an interview with a confessed local leader of Jabhat an Nusra in Idlib in which we heard his ‘spin’ on the Islamic state he hoped would soon replace the inclusive secular government of Bashar al Assad, and accompanied him into Aleppo to launch attacks on government-secured neighbourhoods.(#3) Meanwhile the ABC’s Background Briefing allowed us to hear the viewpoint of Australian jihadis going to fight in Syria, without any countervailing narrative from the Syrians they were going to fight. (#4) The ongoing unverified news reports claiming attacks ‘on markets and schools’ with ‘barrel bombs’ and Chlorine by the Syrian army, as well as opinion from some commentators that the Assad government was a greater threat than Islamic State, provided supportive commentary for the sectarian anti-Assad ravings of the ‘takfiris’.

Considering this background of misleading and false information about the nature of the Syrian conflict, I am frankly quite perplexed at the latest presentations from your government, and in particular the claims you made in Perth recently about the dangers of Da’ish obtaining Chemical Weapons. As reported by Seymour Hersh in his revealing report of December 2013 – ‘Whose Sarin?’- (#5) there was already detailed knowledge in the US intelligence community in May 2013 about the abilities of Jabhat an Nusra to use Sarin, as well as those of AQI, the forerunner of Da’ish. Hersh’s source – a ‘senior intelligence consultant’, reported on a top-secret cable forwarded to the Deputy Director of the Defense Intelligence Agency, David R Shedd, which ‘confirmed previous reports that An Nusra had the ability to acquire and use Sarin’. These followed from investigations of the apparent use of Chemical Weapons in Khan al Assal in March 2013, which had already been verified on the ground by the Russians. Ironically perhaps, it was to investigate this crime committed by ‘rebel groups’ that the UN finally brought its inspectors to Damascus in August at the insistence of the Syrian government.

Expanding on these reports in his second article published by the London Review of Books – ‘Obama, Erdogan and the Syrian Rebels’, with the subtitle ‘The Red line and the Rat line’, (#6) Hersh described the details of the thinking and actions of Turkish intelligence and the Erdogan ‘cabinet’, leaving no doubt about the role Turkey was playing in actively supporting the armed insurgency, both in assisting the supply of fighters and weapons in entering Syria from Turkey, and apparently in working with An Nusra to ‘set up’ the Sarin attack on Ghouta with the express purpose of pushing Obama over his ‘red line’ for military intervention. Following a recent application by Judicial Watch for Defence Department documents significant evidence of the ‘rat line’ from Benghazi to Syria has now confirmed Hersh’s report. (#7)

It is now clear that Erdogan has tired of waiting for the US to commit forces to actively overthrow the Assad government, despite Obama repeating his desire for this to happen; the current joint operation with Saudi Arabia, and Qatar has now taken the ‘intervention’ out of US hands. Not only that – another development so far also apparently ignored by Australia’s government and media threatens to radically escalate the situation into full-scale war. Following the renewed attack on Syria by Turkish/Saudi mercenaries which Tehran quite correctly interprets as a deliberate act of war by Turkey, Ayatollah Khamenei has now formally committed forces to assist the Syrian Arab Army in fighting the insurgency, and killing the terrorist forces or driving them back into Turkey and Jordan. Along with the problems in Iraq, the potential of this war to spread further into Lebanon is most serious; the insurgency already has a strong base of support from Saudi-aligned groups in Tripoli which are opposed by both Hezbollah and the Lebanese army.(#8)

Australia’s involvement in the fight against IS/Da’ish in Iraq which is formally at the invitation of the Baghdad government, ironically puts us on the same side as Iran as Iranian forces are now actively supporting both the Iraqi army and the Iraqi Shi’ite militias who fight with it to drive back Da’ish and restore security to the civilian population. This comes in contrast to US forces, who sought their ‘authorisation’ from the Kurdish regional government. The apparent failure of those US forces to observe and destroy the Islamic State convoy on its long journey across the open desert to reach Ramadi before its recent capture poses some serious questions about US objectives, both in Iraq and Syria. (#9) While Western media have barely asked these questions, military commanders, leaders and public in Syria, Lebanon, Iraq and Iran have already answered them. For these countries and their defence forces, who have to fight and die at the hands of the modern barbarians, distinctions between ‘Da’ish’, Jabhat an Nusra, the ‘Islamic Front’, or ‘the Army of Conquest’ are increasingly irrelevant. The pipeline of support for all these insurgents is the same and contains the same fuel – weapons supplied and paid for by members of the Western coalition, whether formal or implicit. And while we talk endlessly of the unstoppable march of the ‘Islamic State’, and how it reaps billions from ‘selling oil’, we ignore its Achilles heel – the umbilical connection that enables it to survive and fight in the barren deserts of Syria and Iraq. (#10)

I need hardly explain why I am making this application to you, and to the other recipients of this letter; it is clear that there must be a radical re-assessment of Australia’s role in the Syrian conflict, along with a debate on the legitimacy of the parties to it that we are currently supporting. While the deaths of Syrian soldiers and civilians do not affect us directly, policies are being pursued by the government on the basis of the conflict which do. We should also take note of the recent case in the UK where the government sought to prosecute a man who had been fighting with a ‘rebel group’ in Syria. The case was dropped when the defence argued that the rebel group was effectively also being supported by the UK government. (#11)

It is also clear that current developments will surely drag Australia into direct involvement in the Syrian conflict, and an obligation to join the fight not just against Da’ish but against the ‘Army of Conquest’ being supported by our ‘proxy allies’, Saudi Arabia, Qatar and Turkey.

In my opinion a full parliamentary enquiry examining Australia’s commitment to and role in this conflict is necessary and urgent. This should include the role played by our public broadcasters.
I look forward to your response.

Yours etc,
David Macilwain.

[Editor: No response had been received from Ms Bishop at time of publishing this letter on 14 August 2015]

References:

(#1) There were many reports, including in the NYT describing this Saudi-Turkish operation, which began with a visit by President Erdogan to Riyadh:
http://www.hurriyetdailynews.com/turkey-saudi-arabia-agree-to-boost-support-to-syria-opposition.aspx?pageID=238&nID=79091&NewsCatID=510
See also Conn Hallinan’s overview:
http://fpif.org/the-dark-saudi-israeli-plot-to-tip-the-scales-in-syria/
(#2) Robert Fisk reports on the Jisr al Shughour hospital siege:
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/the-syria-hospital-siege-thatturned-into-a-massacre-jisr-alshugour-breakout-was-less-of-a-victory-than-damascus-claims-10301084.html
(#3) SBS Dateline: Najieb Khaja meets former Australian preacher Abu Sulayman Muhajir, ‘leading figure in Jabhat an Nusra’, and provides a platform for his political viewpoint against Syria:
http://www.sbs.com.au/news/dateline/story/western-jihadis-australian-speaks-out-syrias-frontline
(#4) ABC Background Briefing; Sara Dingle speaks to Australian supporters of ISIS, but also provides a platform for their false portrayals of Bashar al Assad and his government:
http://www.abc.net.au/radionational/programs/backgroundbriefing/2015-03-22/6325498
(#5) Veteran investigative journalist Seymour Hersh on questions over the Sarin attack in Ghouta of August 21st 2013:
http://www.lrb.co.uk/v35/n24/seymour-m-hersh/whose-sarin
(#6) The Red line and the Rat line: (please note also the response in Letters from Richard Postol and Theodore Lloyd of MIT following the article)
http://www.lrb.co.uk/v36/n08/seymour-m-hersh/the-red-line-and-the-rat-line
(#7) Defence department predictions for ISIS in 2012 obtained by Judicial Watch:
http://levantreport.com/2015/05/19/2012-defense-intelligence-agency-document-west-will-facilitate-rise-of-islamic-state-in-order-to-isolate-the-syrian-regime/
(#8) Alastair Crooke, former MI6 agent and specialist on ‘Political Islam’, on the coming war:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/alastair-crooke/syria-iraq-fractured_b_7471540.html?utm_hp_ref=tw%3ESunni
(#9) Sharmine Narwani with an Iraqi and ‘Resistance’ viewpoint on the US failure to combat ISIS:
http://rt.com/op-edge/262393-isis-us-coalition-syria-iraq/
(#10) Tony Cartalucci on IS ‘umbilical’:
http://journal-neo.org/2015/06/09/logistics-101-where-does-isis-get-its-guns/
(#11) Richard Norton Taylor on the collapse of the trial of Bherlin Gildo vs UK: (Gildo’s defence referred to evidence cited by Hersh in ‘the red line and rat line’, amongst other information showing Western collusion with terrorist groups including Jabhat an Nusra, which Gildo supported)
http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2015/jun/01/trial-swedish-man-accused-terrorism-offences-collapse-bherlin-gildo

Syria is winning. Despite ongoing bloodshed and serious economic pressure, Syria is advancing steadily towards a military and strategic victory that will transform the Middle East. There is clear evidence that Washington’s plans – whether for ‘regime change’, for rendering the state dysfunctional or for dismembering the country on sectarian lines – have failed.

Although planned invited economic immigrants are far more numerous in Australia, the fuss about accepting or rejecting asylum seekers is so ridiculous when nothing is said about how the wars we support generate nearly all the refugees NATO shudders at the idea of.

I hadn’t been watching SBS latest 3 day Go Back To Where You Came From series, being put off by the obnoxious nationalism of people in the trailers. But I thought to just look at the final part on July 31, 2015. In fact I recorded it and watched a little the next day. I only saw the first 8 minutes, but that was enough to get the gist.

I don’t know who is responsible for SBS bias – unlike the ABC it pretends to be have no editorial control, so maybe this is just the default position.

So where were they going in the Middle East to see the place refugees came from? A refugee camp on the Turkish border, which looked to be in the zone that Turkey has infested with IS terrorists! And who was the refugee sample?

There was a flash back to their meeting in Melbourne with this refugee, who was a Palestinian! She wasn’t a Palestinian fleeing Israel’s ethnic cleansing though. As she related, "I went to buy groceries and there was a helicopter bombing our house."

So she fled to another place, where she was then hit by ISIS, and came to Australia.

But the party didn’t go to Yarmouk and Damascus – they went to the north west to meet the Kurds, who are battling against ‘the worst terrorist organisation in the world’.

This was yet another puff piece for the freedom and music loving Kurds, made before it looked like the Kurds may soon be joining the Syrian army to fight against Turkey and its proxies. And one of our good Aussies said that ‘I’d love to see 14,000 Kurds coming to take refuge in Australia’!

The voice-over, not by the guy who did the last series but by one who sounded like propaganda central, talked about the dangers from the ‘brutal Assad regime’ and from ISIS terrorists, and how this was the worst humanitarian crisis since WW2.

Syrians don't want to come here as refugees; they want Australia to stop supporting the war against their government

All this got me to thinking about the rift between refugee support and the Syrian crisis, and how it is that the people who are really suffering in Syria have no desire to come to Australia as refugees – all they want is for us to stop attacking their homes so they can live there in peace.

So it seems to me that if we actually want to help refugees – at least the ones from our battlefields, we should be putting the pressure on leaders to start working with the Syrian government and to put pressure on Saudi Arabia and Turkey and Israel and the US to go back to where they came from...!

But of course before ‘we’ do that ‘we’ are going to have to understand who are the bad guys in this conflict. (I’ve noticed incidentally that if ABC reporters find a ‘refugee’ in Europe or elsewhere, most of the time they will be ‘Syrian’. On the day I watched my recording of GBTWYCF, I noticed that when Cameron in Britain had said the ‘swarm’ of migrants should go back to West Africa, the ABC interviewed a random migrant in Calais who was.... Syrian!

Of course there is yet another devious agenda here – that Cameron wouldn’t be saying the migrants were mostly from Syria even if they were, because then it would be impossible to turn them away!

There’s a third problem – that migrants across Europe now all say they are from Syria, even when you can see they are Roma, or North African, or just homeless. It’s the best way to get sympathy and money. It was the same last year when we were in Greece, Lebanon, and France.

Documentary, 10 july 2015. One morning in August 2012, renowned Syrian photographer Issa Touma saw young men lugging sandbags into his street. It turned out to be the start of the Syrian uprising in the city of Aleppo. Touma grabbed his camera and spent nine days holed up in his apartment, recording what was happening outside. The result? An unprecedented glimpse into a war that has been raging for three years now. This article originally published here: https://decorrespondent.nl/3043/The-war-outside-the-kitchen-window/155984180-82f330e7.

(Click on the picture to go to the original site to view the video.)

Late last year, Syrian photographer Issa Touma got the world's attention. Amid the violence of the civil war in Syria, he calmly organized a photo exhibition in his Le Pont gallery in Aleppo. Touma believes in art. "It’s the only way to respond to the barbarism," he says.

But the line between art and war reporting can be dangerously thin. When civil unrest broke out in August 2012, Touma's apartment in Aleppo turned out to be situated right on the frontlines of the conflict between rebels from the Free Syrian Army and Bashar al-Assad's government troops.

One summer morning Touma woke to see armed young men stacking sandbags and keeping watch beneath his window. He decided to capture the events on film and kept a video diary from day one. Most often filming from his window, Touma sometimes appears in the frame himself as he waters the plants on his balcony, watches television, or sends a distress call into the world to say that he has run out of food.

In the film, which documents the first nine says of the uprising, we see how the young fighters gradually give way to more heavily armed combatants. We see Touma's neighbors leave their homes, and we see how the Free Syrian Army is defeated.

Then the dreaded Islamist militants appear on the scene – big men, heavily armed, grim, wearing balaclavas. Their presence unmistakably signals the end of what could have been a democratic uprising. The filmmaker realizes that more than anyone else. "I don’t want to film any more," he sighs.

According to Issa Touma, the West is partly to blame for the Syrian uprising getting out of control. After all, the international community stood by and watched as forces from the Gulf States and the Muslim Brotherhood hijacked the revolution at an early stage. Now the world must live with the consequences.

9 Days - From my Window in Aleppo is an initiative of Dutch filmmakers Floor van der Meulen and Thomas Vroege. They compiled the footage captured by Issa Touma into this short film.

This story has since also been reported on 11 August on RT as US ex-intelligence chief on ISIS rise: It was 'a willful Washington decision'. The RT report includes three embedded video broadcasts.

The former director of the US Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) has said that the rise of the ISIL terrorist group in Syria was a “willful decision” made by Washington.

An internal DIA study released recently shows Washington knew that the actions of “the West, (Persian) Gulf countries and Turkey” in Syria may create a Takfiri group like the ISIL.

Article originally published http://www.presstv.ir/Detail/2015/08/08/423762/US-ISIL-Syria-terrorist-group with interview on news program on 8 August 2015.

Michael Flynn, the former head of the DIA, has described the study as important and confirmed its findings.

In an interview with Al Jazeera TV, he said he had studied a DIA memo in 2012 predicting the West’s backing of ISIL in Syria, adding it was very clear intelligence.

When the interviewer asked whether the administration turned a blind eye to his analysis, Flynn said, “I don’t know that they turned a blind eye, I think it was a decision. I think it was a willful decision.”

Asked if it was a willful decision to support an insurgency, he responded, “It was a willful decision to do what they’re doing.”

He also said he had even argued against sponsoring foreign militants in Syria, noting the reason behind the rise of the ISIL was the US and its allies sponsoring terrorists in Syria to pressure Damascus.

Observers say that the US and its allies helped create and train the terrorist organizations to wreak havoc in Muslim countries.

The ISIL militants have seized large swathes of land in Syria and Iraq. They have been carrying out heinous crimes against all communities in both neighboring Arab states.

Elsewhere in his remarks, Flynn admitted that Washington was well aware of the chaos Iraq would face following its withdrawal in 2011.

US warplanes have been conducting airstrikes against ISIL in Iraq since early August 2014. Some Western states have also participated in some of the strikes in Iraq.

Since late September 2014, the US and some of its Arab allies have been carrying out airstrikes against ISIL inside Syria without any authorization from Damascus or a UN mandate.

"We do not pretend to tell Syrians what is right for Syria, just as Syria has respected the Palestinian right to liberate Palestine since the time of the Nakba. However, we declare that the enemies of Syria are the enemies of Palestine, and those who bear arms against the Syrian people and the Syrian army – regardless of their names and affiliations – are mere pawns that serve Israel and its project to divide and control the Arab region. The people who abduct, murder and slaughter in Syria are the enemies of the Arab nation, just like Israel, with which they share goals and criminal nature."

Candobetter.net Editor, Sheila Newman: The statement published in full in this article (which the reader may wish to sign) is the result of an international effort by many individuals to try to help stop the destruction of Syria and the creation of more refugees and stateless persons. It supports the Syrian government and expresses solidarity with the Syrian people. It identifies imperialist forces, including Israel, as trying to divide and reconquer the Arab nations. My understanding is that this statement arose in part out of the fact that Syria has resettled many Palestinians where other states refused, but that political opportunism has caused some Palestinian factions to undermine Syria. I am running this statement because it is anti-war and helps to define the position of Syria in contrast to the deforming lens that Australian and other European Press and governments apply continually. I do not support any anti-Jewish sentiment, but I acknowledge Israel's role in this problem, along with the roles of United States, NATO and Australia. Peace.

Statement of Palestinian groups and individuals in the occupied homeland, refugee camps and the diaspora about the global war on Syria

We are Palestinians and Palestinian organizations that declare our solidarity with the Syrian people in their historic struggle for survival, now in its fifth year. We are in a unique position to understand and appreciate the challenges facing our Syrian brothers and sisters, because we face the same challenges.

We understand what it means to have our lands and our property taken by foreign usurpers. We understand what it means for millions of our people to be driven out of their homes and to be unable to return. We understand what it means for our interests and our national rights to become the plaything of the most powerful nations on earth. We understand what it means to suffer and die in defense of our sovereignty and human rights.

We do not pretend to tell Syrians what is right for Syria, just as Syria has respected the Palestinian right to liberate Palestine since the time of the Nakba. However, we declare that the enemies of Syria are the enemies of Palestine, and those who bear arms against the Syrian people and the Syrian army – regardless of their names and affiliations – are mere pawns that serve Israel and its project to divide and control the Arab region. The people who abduct, murder and slaughter in Syria are the enemies of the Arab nation, just like Israel, with which they share goals and criminal nature.

We therefore reject violence and murder against the people and state of Syria, which has nothing to do with any just demands; rather it merely seeks to destroy the Syrian state. Any attack on Syria is an attack on the Arab nation, and a true national opposition is one that commits to its country’s principles and flies its flag, and that doesn’t receive orders from abroad.

The Palestinian and Syrian struggles are not religious struggles. We respect a state that guarantees freedom of religion without preference for any faith over any other. Dividing Arab communities into conflicting sects only serves the Israeli regime and allows it to implement its plots for the region.

While Palestinian refugees have suffered and are suffering in many places, Syria has welcomed them and granted them all the rights of Syrians except the right to vote. We are grateful for this policy of brotherhood/sisterhood and can do no less than to reciprocate with our solidarity for Syria in its time of greatest need. It is the least we can do.

The cynical and genocidal policies of NATO and its proxies in the Middle East have as their main policy to destroy the last remaining independent nations and forces that are not compromised by complicity with Zionist and imperialist forces. These nations and forces wish no harm to others, yet their mere existence is intolerable to Zionism and imperialism. It is our duty to stand with Syria and all nations and movements that resist the intruders and seek an independent course and policy for the benefit and interest of our own people and not to become puppets of foreign powers.

We therefore stand with Syria in its efforts to repel the foreign invaders and the countries that are creating, training, financing, arming and supporting the terrorist groups in Syria. We call for the expulsion of these groups back to their own countries, and for their supporters to devote their resources to improving the lives of their own citizens in their own countries rather than destroying the lives of our citizens in our countries. Like the alien and racist Zionist regime, these criminal countries and their leadership must be prosecuted for war crimes and crimes against humanity for waging illegal wars against sovereign states and peoples, including Palestine, Libya, Iraq, Syria, Lebanon and Yemen.

More than 1000 Palestinians and Palestinian organizations from across the world have signed this statement, and we now welcome all persons and organizations [whether Palestinian by blood or by heart] to add their names. Just fill in below and submit.  Thank you for your support.

Would you be surprised to know that Australia supports financing motley militia gangs to fight the lawfully elected Bashar al-Assad Government of Syria on the basis of false documents in the mainstream media? Robert Stuart is an anti-war activist whose site records correspondence with the BBC and other mass media about broadcasts which seem to have contained false war documents or in other ways present documents in a faulty way. In this latest correspondence, Stuart complains to the UK Telegraph newspaper that it is recycling as new, the same old footage also recycled as if new by UK Television Channel 4 (the subject of another article here: "Complaint to UK Channel 4 of reuse and relabeling of old film for anti-Syrian propaganda purposes - by Robert Stuart"). We publish Stuart's letters here in order to help create a true record of what is really happening.

Robert Stuart

12:07 AM 19 July 2015

to inquiries

Bashar al-Assad's airmen laugh as they drop barrel bombs on fellow Syrians – The Telegraph, 20 May 2015

Dear Sir or Madam,

I wish to complain that the above print and web article breaches Clause 1 of IPSO's Editors' Code of Practice, relating to Accuracy.

The article refers to “New footage obtained by al-Jazeera” in the subheading and states in the first paragraph that "New footage has emerged showing Syrian aircrew using barrel bombs”.

The Telegraph includes the al Jazeera footage in the online version of its article. However the section of the video commencing at 1 minute 54 seconds, in which a crew member uses a cigarette to light the fuse on a long, slender munition which is then ejected overboard, appears at 4 minutes 32 seconds in this You Tube video which was published on 27 October 2012.

At least part of the al Jazeera footage was therefore over two and half years old – and possibly even older – at the time the Telegraph article was published.

Further statements in the Telegraph article suggest that the al Jazeera footage is contemporary:

- The inclusion of a quote from President Assad from February 2015 denying that his government uses “barrel bombs” indicates that the al Jazeera footage can be considered subsequent evidence countering this claim.

- Foreign Secretary Philip Hammond is quoted saying of the al Jazeera footage: “It shows the casual and indiscriminate way in which Syrian regime forces are dropping these horrific weapons out of helicopters onto civilians below. For months we have seen reports of barrel bombs hitting hospitals and schools, killing thousands.” The use of present tenses (“are dropping”, “have seen”) strongly indicates that the al Jazeera footage is to be understood as depicting current events.

Yours faithfully

Robert Stuart

https://bbcpanoramasavingsyriaschildren.wordpress.com/
Attachments area
Preview YouTube video Leaked: Regime Forces Dropping Barrel Bombs on Homes, Celebrating

This is a letter of complaint to UK television Channel 4 [1] about what looks like recent blatant re-use and relabeling as new film of old film shot in 2012. This film has been used as propaganda against the Syrian Arab Army for the purposes of justifying support of 'rebel' groups, in an article entitled, "Syria: Living under the horrors of barrel bombs in Aleppo." We are republishing it for information and for the record.

Syria: living under the horrors of barrel bombs in Aleppo, Channel 4 News, 10 June 2015.

Dear Sir or Madam

I wish to raise concerns regarding the above Channel 4 News report.

The first video on the Channel 4 News webpage above is captioned “amateur footage of recent barrel bomb attacks in Aleppo and Deraa”. At 34 seconds there is a shot of two men aboard a helicopter, one of whom appears to take a cigarette from the mouth of the other which he uses to light the fuse on a munition which they then both push overboard.

The same scene appears at 23 seconds in the second, longer report on your webpage, at the conclusion of the following narration:

“Sweets for the Syrian rebels yesterday after they drove out Bashar Al Assad’s troops from the Brigade 52 base in Deraa. It’s another setback for the government which has been rapidly losing territory. Syrian air force video online shows the response: they drop four barrel bombs, which hit not only rebel positions but civilians.”  

This clearly indicates that the scenes of the two men pushing the munition out of the helicopter took place shortly after the “rebel” victory in Deraa, which you inform viewers occurred on Tuesday 9 June 2015, and to which the images you show were "the response".

A portion of the same footage of the same two men is included at 27 seconds in video “obtained by Al Jazeera” embedded in a Daily Telegraph article of 20 May. 

However, another portion of the Al Jazeera/Telegraph footage – the section at 1:54 where a crew member uses a cigarette to light the fuse on a long, slender munition which is then ejected overboard – appears at 4:32 in this You Tube video which was published on 27 October 2012.

It would seem very likely that the Al Jazeera footage presented by the Telegraph is all of the same vintage, i.e. around two and half years prior to the Telegraph’s and to your report - and quite possibly even older.

Are you able to provide an assurance that the footage of the two airmen featured in your 10 June report is, as you claim, “recent” and specifically that it represents, as you claim, “the response” to the capture of the Syrian army's Brigade 52 base on Tuesday 9 June 2015?

Yours sincerely

Robert Stuart  

https://bbcpanoramasavingsyriaschildren.wordpress.com/

NOTES

"Channel 4 is a British public-service television broadcaster which began transmission on 2 November 1982. Although largely commercially self-funded, it is ultimately publicly owned; originally a subsidiary of the Independent Broadcasting Authority (IBA), the station is now owned and operated by Channel Four Television Corporation, a public body established in 1990, coming into operation in 1993. With the conversion of the Wenvoe transmitter group in Wales to digital on 31 March 2010, Channel 4 became an entirely UK-wide TV channel for the first time.

The channel was established to provide a fourth television service to the United Kingdom in addition to the television licence-funded BBC's two services and the single commercial broadcasting network, ITV." (Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Channel_4

Today there is heightened concern and fear among western publics about terrorism. There is no doubt that ISIS, along with other jihadi groups, poses a real (if often exaggerated) threat and have committed many heinous atrocities. But the horrible truth is, that the U.S and their G7 'partners' - that is, the political wing of what today makes up a Transnational Elite (i.e. the political, economic, cultural, elites who reside mainly in the G7 and who collectively manage neoliberal globalization) – are not only responsible for far greater crimes (i.e. millions dead and maimed in wars), but share a large degree of the blame for the rise of these groups in the first place.

There is a long history of the Transnational Elite (TE), either directly or indirectly supporting Islamist movements. From the Taliban’s precursors, the Mujahedeen (back then dubbed 'freedom fighters') fighting with U.S support against the progressive Soviet backed government, to the jihadist’s in Libya, who NATO knew from the beginning of that conflict, formed the backbone of the uprising against Gaddafi. Today, we can add the various Islamist groups in Syria, which have been directly and indirectly supported, as declassified U.S defence documents recently confirmed, by the TE in an unholy alliance with reactionary Arab states, such as Qatar, Saudi Arabia and Turkey.

The main reason why the TE has aided such groups is that they have played a useful role in weakening their real target – namely, independent/nationalist governments that, in one way or another, fail to play by the rules of neoliberal globalization, managed by the TE.

These independent governments have in various ways frustrated the TE, not because of their lack of democracy or human rights abuses etc – otherwise how could one explain the continued close alliance between the TE and reactionary regimes e.g. the militarist head chopping Saudi's! But because they have tended to adopt an independent foreign policy – supporting, for example, Palestinian resistance movements – and most of all because they have refused to open up, privatise and liberalize their economies for the further penetration of Transnational Corporations, who today dominate the global economy and who are owned and controlled by economic elites residing mainly with the G7! Syrian President Bashar Al Assad summed all this up well in a recent interview he gave:

"France wanted Syria to play a role with Iran concerning the nuclear file. What was required was not to be part of that file, but to convince Iran to take steps which are against its interests. We refused to do that. They also wanted us to take a position against resistance in our region before putting an end to Israeli occupation and aggression against the Palestinians and other neighboring countries. We refused that too. They wanted us to sign the Euro-Association Agreement which was against our interests and was meant to turn our country into an open market for their products while giving us a very small share of their markets. We refused to do that because it is against the interests of the Syrian people."

With respect to ISIS, it is well documented that this Sunni insurgent group was incubated in the wake of the chaos unleashed by the Iraq war the subsequent dismantling of the Baathist state. But it’s worse than that. The G7 elites were quite happy to let ISIS and other Jihadi groups do their worst in Syria, in coalition with their main agents on the ground the so-called 'free Syrian Army,’….as long as the guns were pointed at the Syrian state which the TE had earmarked for 'regime change'. Up until recently, the western media failed to report the atrocities of these groups and instead blamed everything, despite much counter logic/evidence, on the government.

ISIS only became the official target of the TE when they got out of hand. That is, they started to attack the FSA - the direct agents of the TE on the ground – as well as the pro-western Kurds of Barzani in Northern Iraq, who sit on top of some of the most lucrative oil fields in Iraq! It was these actions that led ISIS to become a target of the TE. Even today, however, the war against them is only cosmetic. Bashar Assad observed that the Syrian Army has carried out many more airstrikes in a single day than the western led coalition of 60 countries has carried out in weeks. Clearly ISIS is being allowed to continue to play a role weakening the main target of the TE: the Syrian Government.

But aren't 'we' (i.e the TE) supporting the 'moderates' in Syria? For starters all of these ‘moderates’ are a far cry from the peaceful protestors we are familiar with – they are armed insurgents. Imagine if western states were faced with armed movements (backed by foreign governments no less!), committing atrocities and aiming to overthrow the government. One can hardly imagine them being labeled ‘moderates’! Perhaps more importantly, almost the entire armed opposition, including the ‘moderates’, are Islamists, not secularists, and their only 'revolutionary' demand is to overthrow Assad! The only force within Syria fighting for secularism is the Syrian Arab Army, which strong evidence and logic suggests, still retains strong support from the majority of Syrians.

That said, as Steven Gowens points out, there is indeed a real difference between the ‘moderates’ and the ‘extremists’ in Syria – that is, ‘if moderate is defined as amenable to direction by Washington.’ And he goes on to spell out the real role these groups play, in the regime change strategy:

"Most rebels are Islamists whose goal is to establish a state governed by the Koran. US strategy in Syria is not to allow Islamists to come to power, but to use them to force a political settlement—one in which Assad steps down and relinquishes power to actors who are keen to turn Syria into a western puppet state, much like the current government in Ukraine, with its cadre of wealthy business people, investment bankers, anti-Russian rightists, and foreigners, including a former US government employee as finance minister."

I disagree with a supposedly 'anarchist' sentiment one sometimes hears: i.e. 'a pox on all your houses'. The implication being, that anarchists should idly sit by in sublime 'neutrality', while the most powerful elites in the world run roughshod over the basic right of all people to national independence/sovereignty, in their bid for reliable client states who will play by the rules of globalization! To me, there is no contradiction in standing up for a people’s right to national sovereignty – even when that means supporting governments and armies we may not like – and being an anarchist.

All this does not mean that I blame everything to do with war and terrorism on the G7 elites. Clearly the conflict in Syria (and elsewhere) emerges out of long tensions between the Syrian secular state and a poor/disenfranchised Muslim minority. Ecological issues, such as rapid population growth across the Middle East in recent decades, and the consequent ‘youth bulge,’ have also played a major role enhancing tensions. Then there is the whole question of why Islamic/religious fundamentalism has been resurgence in recent decades – a question, which has been well addressed from radical left perspectives by Saral Sarkar here and Takis Fotopoulos here.

In a real sense we too – the ordinary citizens of the west – are culpable. Not just due to our lack of interest in these issues, or willingness to speak out or protest about what governments do in our name. Even more so because we continue to demand the affluent middle class lifestyles that, in a real sense, are the spoils of a now globalized transnational empire of capital. Yes, the super-corporate rich are the main beneficiaries, but the middle class billions – still a small minority of the world’s population – are also beneficiaries, at least in a narrow material sense. As Ted Trainer reminds us, in a world of scarce resources, ‘if you want affluence, prepare for war.’

So next time a discussion among your family and friends breaks out about issues of militarism, terrorism and war, tell them that to overcome this sad syndrome requires some radical actions. In the short term we must speak out against the global power elites who are often supporting or helping terrorists to flourish in their attempts to undermine independent/nationalist governments. But we also need to work toward the long-term transformation of our own societies, towards systems, cultures and lifestyles that do not require us to take more than our fair share of world resources. We need to work, in other words, towards a simpler way.

One of the main reasons I hate Wall Street and War Street is that they are usually lying through their teeth to us. Fortunately, however, there are usually actual eye-witnesses to what really happened as well, and these actual eye-witnesses are always calling Wall Street and War Street out for their lies -- but none of that even seems to matter. Remember all the lies we were told about Vietnam? Iraq? Afghanistan? Libya? Palestine? Bosnia? Ukraine? Panama? Guatemala? Granada? And how we were always warned about these lies? And yet all those "wars" went on anyway.

And here is just one more example of the kind of pretty lies that we are constantly being told -- this time about Syria. An internet friend of mine who I met after visiting Damascus last year is now living in Aleppo and he sent me the following eye-witness 411 about what is really going on in his town.

So you read this. And you have been told. By an actual eye-witness. But does that mean that the unjust and mendacious "war" on the Syrian people will now stop, now that you actually know the actual truth? Obviously not.

"We didn't sleep at all last night," my friend Waheed (not his real name)[1] wrote me today from his home in Aleppo. "Attacks by the so-called 'moderate rebels' started in the afternoon yesterday and continued constantly up until this morning. The news here said that three or four civilians died and that 87 civilians were injured. But the ambulance sirens didn't stop all night long."

Hey, Waheed, are you okay? Apparently yes, but just barely.

"I'm sure that you have heard time and again in the American media," said Waheed, "that Syrians support the so-called 'moderate rebels'. But every single one of the people I know over here do not -- and aren't they the real Syrians? And after all these years and after all these attacks on them and after they have lost their income sources and family members, they are still asking the Syrian army to fight on their behalf, to terminate these vicious attackers and their nests, which have become like cancer in our body."

But what about the barrel bombs we hear so much about? I asked.

"At this point in time," said Waheed, "the Syrian people no longer even care if the termination of these terrorist who are invading our homes is by chemical weapons, bombs or whatever. All we want is for the killing of Syrians to stop. Yet, around the world and in the mainstream media, they still dare to demonize the so-called 'barrel bombs' of the Syrian army and they talk about the loss of lives of ISIS terrorists as if it was the loss of lives of some mythological Syrian peaceful moderate opposition who had been killed by a dictator!"

Waheed is totally pissed off that all these lies are being spread around. Barrel bombs? Really? When the terrorists' ISIS version of Freddie Kruger is being armed, trained and paid for by US, Saudi, Israeli and Turkish neo-colonialists who are only after capturing Syria's land and oil? Barrel bombs are the bad guys here? I think not.

"I don't swear, and I'm fasting this month," Waheed said next, "but this injustice is unlimited and it makes me and many others here feel like we are going to explode with cursing and swearing against all that nonsense of people lecturing in some conference in Britain this week or people at the UN who are telling nothing but lies and hypocrisy."

Part of Waheed's family spent last night huddled in the bathroom of their house because it was the safest room. "Everyone there was crying and terrified by the 'moderate peaceful opposition' as their house is located close to one of the conflicts lines. But the Syrian army can't bomb these ISIS and foreign-fighter terrorists because then the 'international community' will accuse the Syrian army of using this unprecedented super-ultra-modern weapon that is way stronger than a nuclear bomb: Barrel bombs!"

Yeah, right. And next the Syrian army will probably be accused of illegally using fire crackers or cap guns to protect themselves.

"The terrorists are using mortars, explosive bullets, cooking-gas-cylinder bombs and bombs made out of water-heater cylinders; filled up with explosives and shrapnel and nails, and fired by what they call "Hell Canons". Just Google these weapons or see their YouTube clips." Yes, they still do have Google in Aleppo -- but not for long if Obama and Bibi and Turkish hard-liners and the House of Saud have their way.

"The cooking-gas cylinder is made of steel, and it weighs around 25 kg. Imagine it thrown by a canon to hit civilians? And imagine knowing that it is full with explosives? And yet, the mainstream media in America is all busy with the legendary weapon of 'barrel bombs'! And also filled up with how these terrorist ISIS 'moderate rebels' came to spread 'freedom' among Syrians! How dare they say that Syrian army shouldn't fight them back?"

And meanwhile the fighting just keeps getting closer to Waheed's house. "For the first time last night, we smelled gunpowder. The shelling was so extreme and so close as to leave the smell gunpowder in the air." Yet no one at the UN complains about the American-backed terrorists.

"The results of last night's shelling was nothing but more new innocent civilian victims," said Waheed. At this point I'm almost ready to cry.

"I mean, the terrorists failed in gaining new land or occupying new buildings or quarters. They lost many of their foreign-fighter cannon-fodder 'zombies' here of course but their zombies don't count because they are being paid to fight and have no families or friends here to weep over their mangled bodies like is the case with our civilians."

Waheed then apologizes for being so upset -- as if he didn't have a legitimate reason. I know if it was my family and neighbors who were being blown up by terrorist death machines, I'd be too hysterical to even put words on a page!

"Mostly I'm not so much upset by the attackers and whoever is supporting them in Turkey over here (and Israel and Jordan in the south); but mainly from the liars in that conference in Britain or at the UN, who keep lying and lying, telling piles and tons of lies, about 'freedom' and 'barrel bombs' -- and they live in their perfumed and ironed suits and ties, happy with their Ph.D degrees in stupidity and fooling the world, having no problem in obtaining clean water, electricity, hot food and the rest of the services that we are suffering over here to obtain, even a part of them.

"Those people travel in 1st class airlines and live in 5-star hotels, and are ready to come on TV to weep over the fate of the 'Syrian people' and blame the 'regime' -- while giving a blind eye upon all the terrorists they are funding and supporting. I wish these people, whether they are Arabs or Western, Muslims or Christians, Syrians or others... I wish them Hell! And to taste and suffer the same pain they are causing to the innocent Syrian people." Me too!

These pond-scum should be evicted from their 5-star hotels and forced to go live out the reality that they now happily force millions of others to endure.

"The Syrian army has defended our city, and all the lies on the media claiming terrorists' victories are nothing but rumors and gossip. But that's all for today. Take care." You too, Waheed.

NOTES

Jane Stillwater and candobetter.net have the same correspondent from Aleppo, whom we reported here: Aleppo, Syria: 2nd-3rd July 2015 attacks - Please stop blaming the Syrian Government However Jane has had some more dialogue with him which means that the block of words we posted originally has been clarified, contexted and better explained in this article of Jane's.

First published on Jane Stillwater's blog at http://jpstillwater.blogspot.com/2015/07/syria-where-america-drops-barrel-bombs.html

By Sayed Hasan (27/6/15) republished from GlobalResearch. This article includes three embedded videos with transcripts.
Update, 4 July 2015: France rejects asylum request from Assange | Sky News.
Updates, 1 July 2015: Western Presstitutes Dumbfounded by Vladimir Putin’s 89% Approval Rating by Paul Craig Roberts, What does Vladimir Putin’s 89% rating really mean? by The Saker.

75.5% of Russians
support President
Vladimir Putin

“As you know, the modern world, especially the Western world, is highly monopolised and many Western countries – whether they want to hear this or not – have voluntarily given up a considerable part of their sovereignty. To some extent, this is a result of the politics of blocs. Sometimes we find it very difficult to come to terms with them on geopolitical issues. It is hard to reach an agreement with people who whisper even at home for fear of being overheard by the Americans. This is not a joke or a figure of speech.” (Vladimir Putin)

Vladimir Putin denounces, more and more explicitly, the servility of France and Europe towards the United States, whether in the case of wire-tapping French leaders or that of the Mistral ships.

The publication by WikiLeaks of documents establishing the wire-tapping by the United States of three French Presidents was an open secret known since the revelations of Edward Snowden. Far from protesting against the flagrant violation of French sovereignty that the espionage of its top leaders constitutes, our government bravely hastened to hush up this scandal, as was expected by Lavrov and Putin. Let us remember that France prided herself in 2013 for having rejected the asylum for Edward Snowden, and that it is illusory to believe that these revelations could change anything : official France cannot but turn down flat Julian Assange's calls.

Francois Hollande com-
plains of alleged Rus-
sian interference in Uk-
raine whilst arming ter-
rorists fighting the pop-
ularly elected Syrian
President Bashar al-
Assad. This war has,
so far, cost the lives of
220,000 Syrians by one
estimate.

By refusing the delivery of two helicopter carriers ordered and paid for by Russia, France is both disgraced and discredited internationally as a reliable economic partner and military supplier. The inept pretext of the Ukrainian crisis and alleged Russian interference, invoked by a country that involved itself in the Syrian crisis by arming Al-Nusra terrorists (of which it is apologetic) and calling for the overthrow (even murder) of the legitimate Syrian leader, reveals the extent of the hypocrisy and indecency of the French government and its subjection to American diktats. Especially since this same government then concluded huge arms sales contracts with the barbaric regimes of Qatar and even Saudi Arabia, engaged in an illegal and criminal war in Yemen.

While trade between the US and Russia is increasing, their European “allies” are forced to impose sanctions on Moscow and suffer alone its formidable repercussions: thus Vladimir Putin has renewed for one year the Russian embargo on food products from Europe.

Vladimir Putin recently said to Charlie Rose, an American TV star presenter who asked incredulously if Russia really aspired to gain respect (indeed, what a preposterous idea):

“You know, I hear this all the time: Russia wants to be respected. Don't you? Who does not? Who wants to be humiliated? It is a strange question. As if this is some exclusive right – Russia demands respect. Does anyone like to be neglected?” To this rhetorical question, our French leaders respond ‘yes’ without hesitation and continue to whisper in their own homes for fear of prying ears (and microphones).

Instead of a rapprochement with Russia, a historic partner concerned about the respect of States and their sovereignty, in addition a rising great power and champion of the defence of international law, France and Europe prefer subjugation to the US, the superpower in irremediable decline with which they chain their destinies. It is easy to conceive the repulsion that Russian elites, despite their professionalism, must feel for our inglorious leaders. Probably to the extent of the felt more and more by their own peoples, whom Putin chooses to address directly.

Former arrogant colonial power and conqueror, then sovereignist Gaullist Republic, France is now relegated to the status of American sub-colony whose independence and national interests are routinely violated and trampled, as much by the stateless and spineless leaders in Paris, repeatedly guilty of the crime of high treason (abolished, thankfully for them), as by the imperial hawks in Washington.

Even a country like Algeria, a former French colony run by a corrupt and retrograde military regime, has at least leaders concerned of their national interests to the point of refusing any participation in the Saudi-American coalition against Yemen, while Hollands’ France was ready to pounce gleefully on a new crusade in Syria, which could have triggered World War III. One may ask, to use an expression of Norman Finkelstein, why prostitutes have such a bad reputation... Welcome to Western mediocracy!

Sayed 7asan

Translated from French by Jenny Bright

Copyright Sayed Hasan, 2015

Transcripts

Vladimir Putin on the tapping of French Presidents: This scandal will be stifled (English subtitles)

Briefing session with permanent members of the Security Council of the Russian Federation, 25 June 2015

Source: http://en.kremlin.ru/events/president/news/49766

Transcript:

President of Russia Vladimir Putin: Good afternoon, colleagues,

Mr Lavrov will tell us about the consultations in Paris. Let's start with this. Please, Mr Lavrov.

Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov:On the whole, it was not useless because even despite certain wrangling during the discussion, the main outcome was the acknowledgement of the fact that there is no alternative to complete fulfilment of the Minsk Agreements. First and foremost, the acknowledgement by our German and our French partners of the fact that the overwhelming part of the Minsk provisions should be implemented through direct dialogue between authorities in Kiev and Donetsk and Lugansk.

I can't say that we have resolved all the problems because this should be done directly by the Contact group and the working subgroups created. I will report on that in more detail later, but on the day of our meeting, a report on the taps [by the United States of the French leadership] was published, and this gave rise to unrest in France so this was another thing that distracted our attention.

Vladimir Putin: How will this scandal end?

Sergei Lavrov: Frankly speaking, I think that Germany's example [the US special services wiretapping the German leadership] gives the answer: I think that both sides will try to blanket the scandal and forget about it.

Vladimir Putin: That is what would happen.

Putin denounces the ’submission’ of France: ”Even without Mistral, we will survive” (English subtitles)

Direct Line with Vladimir Putin, April 16, 2015

Source: http://en.kremlin.ru/events/president/news/49261

Transcript:

[...]

Olga Ushakova: Let’s take another question from the audience – from Dmitry Shchugorev's section this time.

Dmitry Shchugorev: We have Dmitry Abzalov here, the president of the Center for Strategic Communications. Please, go ahead.

Dmitry Abzalov: Good afternoon, Mr Putin. I have this nagging question about Mistral ships. This week, the second ship was tested and left for the French shipyard. What are the prospects? Will we push for having these ships delivered to us? Will we seek financing? In general, what will our military and economic partnership with the European Union and France, in particular, be like after what happened a year ago?

Vladimir Putin: The refusal to deliver ships under the existing contract is, of course, a bad sign. However, frankly speaking, it's of little consequence for us or our defence capability. We signed these contracts primarily to support our partners and offer work to their shipyard. We planned to use the ships in the Far East. For us, this is not critical.

However, I believe that the leadership of France – and the French people in general – are honourable people and will return the money. We are not even going to demand any penalties or exorbitant fines, but we want all of our costs covered. This certainly means that the reliability of our partners – who, acting as part of the military-political bloc, in this case NATO, have lost some of their sovereignty – has suffered, and is now questionable. Of course, we will keep this in mind as we continue our military and technical cooperation.

Kirill Kleymenov: Our partners may find that it was an easy way for them to get off the hook.

Vladimir Putin: That's all right, we'll survive.

[...]

Vladimir Putin to the peoples of the West: Russia is not an imperial power, the US spy on NATO members (English subtitles)

Speech by Vladimir Putin on the integration of the Crimea to Russia, March 18, 2014 – With a reflection on this intervention dated April 22, 2014

Source : http://eng.kremlin.ru/news/6889

Transcript:

[...]

Today, I would like to address the people of the United States of America, the people who, since the foundation of their nation and adoption of the Declaration of Independence, have been proud to hold freedom above all else. Isn't the desire of Crimea's residents to freely choose their fate such a value? Please understand us.

I believe that the Europeans, first and foremost, the Germans, will also understand me. Let me remind you that in the course of political consultations on the unification of East and West Germany, at the expert, though very high level, some nations that were then and are now Germany's allies did not support the idea of unification. Our nation, however, unequivocally supported the sincere, unstoppable desire of the Germans for national unity. I am confident that you have not forgotten this, and I expect that the citizens of Germany will also support the aspiration of the Russians, of historical Russia, to restore unity.

I also want to address the people of Ukraine. I sincerely want you to understand us: we do not want to harm you in any way, or to hurt your national feelings. We have always respected the territorial integrity of the Ukrainian state, incidentally, unlike those who sacrificed Ukraine's unity for their political ambitions. They flaunt slogans about Ukraine's greatness, but they are the ones who did everything to divide the nation. Today's civil standoff is entirely on their conscience. I want you to hear me, my dear friends. Do not believe those who want you to fear Russia, shouting that other regions will follow Crimea. We do not want to divide Ukraine; we do not need that. As for Crimea, it was and remains a Russian, Ukrainian, and Crimean-Tatar land.

I repeat, just as it has been for centuries, it will be a home to all the peoples living there. What it will never be and do is follow in Bandera's footsteps!

[...]

Direct Line with Vladimir Putin – April 17, 2014

Source : http://en.kremlin.ru/events/president/news/20796

Transcript:

[...]

Kirill Kleymenov: But before giving the floor to [our correspondent in Germany], I'd like to ask you to return to the speech that we discussed at the very beginning, the one that you made before signing the treaty on Crimea and Sevastopol's accession to Russia. Many people were very impressed by it and compared it to your Munich speech. They even called it your best speech.

I'd like to ask you why you made this speech. First, the protocol didn't demand it and, second, the format was very unusual – you addressed peoples rather than countries or governments.

Vladimir Putin: The format was chosen based on the importance of the event and the situation. This is an unusual event in the life of our people, our country and our state. This is why I considered it my duty to address the Federal Assembly and the people of the Russian Federation in the presence of members of the State Duma and the Federation Council. This is the first point.

Second. Why was the speech addressed to the peoples of other countries rather than their governments? As you know, the modern world, especially the Western world, is highly monopolised and many Western countries – whether they want to hear this or not – have voluntarily given up a considerable part of their sovereignty. To some extent, this is a result of the politics of blocs. Sometimes we find it very difficult to come to terms with them on geopolitical issues. It is hard to reach an agreement with people who whisper even at home for fear of being overheard by the Americans. This is not a joke or a figure of speech. Listen to me, I'm serious, I'm not joking. However, they are our main partners on economic and some other issues.

But I addressed the peoples of these countries primarily because an ordinary person from Germany, France or Italy will instantly sense whether a statement is false or not. Our position is absolutely open, honest and transparent, and for this reason it is easier to get it across to ordinary people than even to some leaders. It seems to me we succeeded to some extent. No matter what government rules a country, it will have to consider the opinion of its voters. This is why I addressed the people.

[...]

The June 7 parliamentary election in Turkey could have a huge impact on the conflict in Syria. The invincible image of President Erdogan has been cracked. There is a real chance that the election might lead to substantive change in Turkish foreign policy promoting the war in Syria. (This article first published at Dissident Voice on June 24th, 2015.)

Even though Erdogan’s Justice and Development Party (AKP) won the most votes, they lost their majority in parliament and must now find a coalition partner. Turkey’s new parliament was seated for the first time on Tuesday June 23. Now begins the political bargaining and negotiations to form a governing coalition.  Depending on the outcome, Turkey may stop or seriously restrict the flow of weapons and foreign fighters through its territory into Syria.  If Turkey does this, it would offer a real prospect for movement toward negotiations and away from war in Syria. Why?  The Syrian war continues because Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Kuwait, USA, France, UK and others are spending billions of dollars annually to fund the armed opposition and sustain the war in violation of the UN Charter and international law.

Closely allied with Qatar and the Muslim Brotherhood, Turkey has been the primary path for weapons and foreign fighters in Syria. ISIS has depended on export of oil and import of weapons and fighters through Turkey.  Jabhat al Nusra, Ahrar al Sham and other armed opposition groups have depended on weapons and foreign fighters coming in via Turkey for attacks on northern Syria including Syria’s largest city, Aleppo.

Turkish Government Support of War on Syria

The following examples show the extent of Turkish involvement in the war on Syria:

• Turkey hosts the Political and Military Headquarters of the armed opposition. Most of the political leaders are former Syrians who have not lived there for decades.
• Turkey provides home base for armed opposition leaders. As quoted in the Vice News video Syria: Wolves of the Valley: “Most of the commanders actually live in Turkey and commute in to the fighting when necessary.”
• Turkey’s intelligence agency MIT has provided its own trucks for shipping huge quantities of weapons and ammunition to Syrian armed opposition groups.  According to court testimony they made at least 2,000 trips to Syria.
• Turkey is suspected of supplying the chemical weapons used in Ghouta in August 2013 as reported by Seymour Hersh here.  In May 2013, Nusra fighters were arrested in possession of sarin but quickly and quietly released by Turkish authorities.
• Turkey’s foreign minister, top spy chief and senior military official were secretly recorded plotting an incident to justify Turkish military strikes against Syria. A sensational recording of the meeting was publicized, exposing the plot in advance and likely preventing it from proceeding.
• Turkey has provided direct aid and support to attacking insurgents. When insurgents attacked Kassab Syria on the border in spring 2014, Turkey provided backup military support and ambulances for injured fighters. Turkey shot down a Syrian jet fighter that was attacking the invading insurgents. The plane landed 7 kms inside Syrian territory, suggesting that Turkish claims it was in Turkish air space are likely untrue.
• Turkey has recently increased its coordination with Saudi Arabia and Qatar. This has led to the recent assaults by thousands of foreign fighters on Idlib and Jisr al Shugour in northern Syria. Armed with advanced weaponry including TOW missiles, and using suicide bomb vehicles, the armed groups over-ran Syrian armed forces defending both cities. The assaults were facilitated by Turkey jamming and disrupting Syrian radio communications.
• Turkey has facilitated travel into northern Syria by extremist mercenaries from all parts of the globe including Chechen Russians, Uyghur Chinese, Europeans, North Africans, South Asians including Indonesians and Malaysians.  The assault on Jisr al Shugour was spearheaded by Chinese Uyghur fighters and suicide bombers crossing over from Turkey with tanks and heavy artillery.
• Turkey itself has provided steady supply of recruits to the Islamic State. Like other countries which have had citizens indoctrinated with wahabi fanaticism, they have done little or nothing to limit the indoctrination or restrict emigration for ‘jihad’.
• Turkey has permitted the supply of huge quantities of car bomb ingredients (ammonium nitrate fertilizer) to the Islamic State. On May 4 the NY Times reported these shipments at the Turkish border. Sixteen days later ISIS over-ran Ramadi in an assault that began with 30 car bombs with ten reportedly the size of the Oklahoma City bombing.
• Finally, as part of its continuing effort to draw the U.S. and NATO into direct participation in the war on Syria, Turkey is an active player in various propaganda campaigns. For example, the “White Helmets” or “Syrian Civil Defence” are trained and supplied in Turkey. Some of the videos purportedly from Syria are likely filmed in Turkey at their training site. White Helmets and Syrian Civil Defence are both creations of the West and join with Turkey in calling for a “No Fly Zone”.

Turkish Repression of Journalism, Police and Courts

The AKP government has vigorously tried to suppress information about the extent of Turkey’s support of the war on Syria. They have resorted to repression and intimidation such as:

• Turkish authorities have charged four regional prosecutors with attempting to topple the government. Their “crime” was to insist on the inspection of four trucks headed from Turkey to Syria. The trucks contained weapons and ammunition in violation of Turkish law. The trial of the four prosecutors is ongoing, 18 months after the inspection.
• Turkish authorities arrrested seven high ranking military officers over the inspection of trucks taking weapons and fighters to Syria.
• Turkish authorities banned social media and news outlets from reporting on arms shipments through Turkey to Syria. Twitter and Facebook accounts that talked about the shipments where shut down. Erdogan went on to threaten to “eradicate” Twitter.
• Turkish President Erdogan threatened two life term sentences for the editor of Hurriyet daily newspaper for publicizing support of the armed opposition in Syria by Turkey’s intelligence agency MIT.
• A whistle-blowing MIT (intelligence agency) officer who opposed the agency’s collusion with terrorism in Syria was arrested, convicted and imprisoned. After two years he managed to escape and tell his story. The blockbuster account was broadcast on Turkey’s OdaTV and later translated into English and published here.

Was American Journalist Serena Shim Murdered?

As seen in the examples above, Turkish AKP authorities have aggressively tried to suppress information on the involvement in Syria. If they have been that aggressive with Turkish journalists, prosecutors and military officers, how far might they go against a foreign journalist working for Iran’s Press TV?

The American born journalist Serena Shim died just days after she documented the use of World Food Program trucks to transport foreign fighters to the border with Syria and into ISIS territory.  After learning that Turkish intelligence was looking for her, Serena Shim was so concerned that she expressed her fear on television. Two days later, Serena Shim’s car was hit head-on by a cement truck.  The driver of the cement truck disappeared but was later found. There are many discrepancies about what happened. The first reports indicated the truck and driver left without stopping.  Then the driver and truck were located, and then photos appeared showing a collision.

While some Turkish security services have preemptively exonerated the driver of the cement truck,  the local prosecutor has filed charges against the driver, accusing him of causing death through negligence. There are many suspicious aspects, not least is the fact that the cement truck’s wheels are angled toward the car, not away as one would expect with a vehicle trying to avoid collision.

The death of American journalist Serena Shim, and her factual investigative reporting on Syria and Turkey, stands in sharp contrast with the sensational media accounts about the “kidnapping” of NBC reporter Richard Engel. That event turned out to be a hoax contrived by “rebels” to manipulate American political opinion.  With the complicity of individual reporters and mainstream media, the fraud was successful.  The bias in mainstream western media is further demonstrated by the almost complete media silence about the death of Serena Shim and her important journalistic work.

Turkey’s Election

For the past 13 years Erdogan’s Justice and Development Party (AKP) has had majority control of Turkey’s parliament.  In the recent election AKP’s share of the popular voted plummeted 10% and they lost their parliamentary majority.  The results are a clear rebuff to Erdogan and AKP policies.  Sixty percent of voters went against AKP, splitting the vote among the three alternative parties. The pro-Kurdish and Leftist People’s Democratic Party (HDP) burst onto the scene capturing 13% of the votes and equaling the number of parliamentary seats captured by the rightist and anti-Kurdish National Movement Party (MHP). The main opposition party is the social democratic Republican Peoples Party (CHP) with 26% of the vote.

Over the coming weeks, AKP will try to form a coalition government with one or more of the alternate parties.  However, it won’t be easy. The natural bedfellow would be the anti-Kurdish and rightist MHP, but they are demanding the resumption of a corruption trial against AKP leaders including Erdogan’s son Bilal.  That trial would probably lead back to President Erdogan himself, so it seems unlikely AKP will ally with MHP. The three alternative parties could form a coalition to govern without AKP, but it’s hard to imagine the staunchly anti-Kurdish MHP allying with the pro-Kurdish HDP.

If a majority coalition cannot be formed within 45 days, the Turkish constitution requires a rerun of the election.

Election Should Bring Major Change in Syrian Policy

Even with severe repression and intimidation, the Turkish public is aware of Turkey’s policy supporting war on Syria. One consequence of the war has been almost 2 million immigrant refugees with the dispersal of many throughout Turkey, providing cheap labor and adding significantly to the unemployment problem.  In addition, there have been terrorist attacks in the border region and an escalation of corruption and repression as external money and weapons have flooded the area en route to Syria. The war against Syria has been widely unpopular and played a significant role in the election.

• All the opposition parties called for change in Turkey’s foreign policy.
• Criticism of Erdogan and Davutoglu’s policy even comes from within the AKP membership: “Many believe that one reason for the AKP’s dismal showing in the 2015 elections is its policy on Syria.”
• The head of the main opposition party (CHP) says Turkey will start controlling the border and stop the flood of arms and fighters into Syria.

The coming weeks will indicate how Turkey moves forward:  Will AKP manage to form a coalition government with one of the opposition parties? Or will there be another election?

Will Turkey start enforcing the border and stop shipments of arms to the armed opposition as demanded by the leader of the main opposition party?  This would be a huge change in the dynamics within Syria. Without a rear base of constant and steady support, the armed opposition would be forced to rely on their own resources rather than those of foreign governments.  They would quickly wither since they have very little support base within Syria.

Since the election, there are already signs of a shift in the balance. Kurdish forces recently captured ISIS’ important border crossing at Tal Abyad. This has been the main route of weapons, fighters and supplies between Turkey and the Islamic State’s ‘capital’ at Raqqa in eastern Syria.

The Past Year and Looking Ahead

Thirteen months ago it looked like the war in Syria was starting to move toward resolution. The last remaining armed opposition in the “capital of the revolution” Homs, reached reconciliation and withdrew from the Old City of Homs in May 2014.  On June 3, 2014 the election in Syria confirmed substantial support for the government.

Since then, we have seen dramatic changes. On June 10, 2014 ISIS surged through western Iraq and captured the city of Mosul and huge quantities of American armaments including tanks, rockets, humvees, etc. That led to the creation of the “Islamic State” and expansion in eastern Syria including Tabqa Air Base where hundreds of Syrian soldiers and ISIS fighters died.

This past spring saw the coalescing of numerous foreign and Islamist groups into the Jaish al Fatah (Army of Conquest) supported by Turkey, Saudi Arabia and Qatar.  With high powered TOW anti-tank missiles and thousands of shock troops they were able to overtake both Idlib and Jisr al Shugour near the Turkish border.

ISIS and the Army of Conquest are both dependent on the Turkish supply line. If that is closed off or seriously restricted, it will dramatically change the situation.

With the prospect of losing their base of support in Turkey, will the opposition try something desperate to draw the US and NATO into the conflict directly?

The Turkish people have indicated they want to stop their government’s war on Syria.  If their will is respected, it should lead to restricting and stopping the foreign funding and promotion of the conflict. If Turkey stops the flood of weapons and foreign fighters into northern Syria, it will be following instead of violating international law. This will give peace a chance in Syria.

Rick Sterling is active with the Syria Solidarity Movement and Mt Diablo Peace and Justice Center. He can be emailed at: [email protected]. Read other articles by Rick.

This article was posted on Wednesday, June 24th, 2015 at 7:53pm and is filed under Elections, France, Kuwait, NATO, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Syria, Terrorism (state and retail), Turkey, United Kingdom.